From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Jean-Pierre Pelletier <jean(dot)pierre(dot)pelletier0(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Out arguments name of "pg_identify_object_as_address" function in 9.5.14 and 11beta3 |
Date: | 2018-09-03 18:36:31 |
Message-ID: | 6649.1535999791@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jean-Pierre Pelletier <jean(dot)pierre(dot)pelletier0(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Two of the out arguments name of function
> "pg_identify_object_as_address" are not as documented.
> Documentation says "name" and "args", but function returns
> "object_names" and "object_args".
Hm, yeah. The documentation of pg_get_object_address() seems
equally divorced from reality. What's more, while pg_get_object_address
and pg_identify_object_as_address agree on the naming of the
internal-representation arguments (classid,objid,objsubid),
they don't agree on the naming of the other arguments
(type,name,args vs. type,object_names,object_args). Somebody
was being pretty inconsistent there.
I do not think we can change the names of the output arguments;
it'd break existing queries. However, renaming input arguments
shouldn't affect anything. So I propose we make pg_get_object_address'
input arguments be named type,object_names,object_args for
consistency with the other function, and update the docs to match.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-09-03 18:42:31 | Re: Caching query plan costs |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2018-09-03 18:33:35 | Re: Caching query plan costs |