Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Laurenz Albe
Тема Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments
Дата
Msg-id efe55e8d2d83c3761e46789fa86cdc4b013a7ba6.camel@cybertec.at
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 2021-05-31 at 15:55 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > If I have two procedures
> > p1(IN int, IN int, OUT int, OUT int)
> > p1(OUT int, OUT int)
> > then a DROP, or ALTER, or GRANT, etc. on p1(int, int) should operate on 
> > the second one in a spec-compliant implementation, but you propose to 
> > have it operate on the first one.  That kind of discrepancy would be 
> > really bad to have.
> 
> We already have that situation for functions.  I think having procedures
> work differently from functions is much worse than your complaint here;
> and I do not see why being spec-compliant for one case when we are not
> for the other is a good situation to be in.

+1

Yours,
Laurenz Albe




В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: be-secure-gssapi.c and auth.c with setenv() not compatible on Windows
Следующее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Alias collision in `refresh materialized view concurrently`