Re: targetlist functions part 1 (was [HACKERS] targetlist
| От | Joe Conway |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: targetlist functions part 1 (was [HACKERS] targetlist |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 3E3E836D.8030400@joeconway.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: targetlist functions part 1 (was [HACKERS] targetlist (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: targetlist functions part 1 (was [HACKERS] targetlist
|
| Список | pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: >>Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at: > > This patch was objected to by Peter, IIRC, and I think I agree with him. > We should look at whether we can't solve the problem via SQL99 features > before pumping new life into that crufty old Berkeley syntax. I know I haven't had time to absorb Peter's suggestions and comment, but I think the current behavior is broken, and this patch should be applied anyway (this was only yhe first half of my proposal -- i.e. prevent more than one targetlist srf). The only reason I can think to not apply it, is if you think we should completely disallow targetlist set returning functions as part of moving to SQL99. Joe
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: