Re: "Cast" SRF returning record to a table type?
От | Jim Nasby |
---|---|
Тема | Re: "Cast" SRF returning record to a table type? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5531D701.5060206@BlueTreble.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: "Cast" SRF returning record to a table type? ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: "Cast" SRF returning record to a table type?
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On 4/17/15 7:39 PM, David G. Johnston wrote: > On Friday, April 17, 2015, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com > <mailto:Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>> wrote: > > I'm working on a function that will return a set of test data, for > unit testing database stuff. It does a few things, but ultimately > returns SETOF record that's essentially: > > RETURN QUERY EXECUTE 'SELECT * FROM ' || table_name; > > Because it's always going to return a real relation, I'd like to be > able to the equivalent of: > > SELECT ... FROM my_function( 'some_table' )::some_table; > > > Unfortunately this means "cast the existing type to some_table" and > "record" is not a valid type in this context. > > > Is there any trick that would allow that to work? I know that > instead of 'SELECT * ...' I can do 'SELECT row(t.*) FROM ' || > table_name || ' AS t' and then do > > SELECT ... FROM my_function( 'some_table' ) AS data( d some_table ) > > but I'm hoping to avoid the extra level of indirection. > > Haven't explored this specific code in depth...but which part - the > function alias or the select row(t.*)? They seem to be independent > concerns. I'm saying that I know I can use the row construct as a poor work-around. What I actually want though is a way to tell this query: SELECT ... FROM my_function( 'some_table' ) that my_function is returning a record that exactly matches "my_table". I suspect there's not actually any way to do that :( -- Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: