From: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | AW: Fix for tablename in targetlist |
Date: | 2001-05-21 15:20:40 |
Message-ID: | 11C1E6749A55D411A9670001FA6879633682DD@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
> True, although there's a certain inconsistency in allowing a whole row
> to be passed to a function by
>
> select foo(pg_class) from pg_class;
>
> and not allowing the same row to be output by
Imho there is a big difference between the two. The foo(pg_class) calls a function
with argument type opaque or type pg_class.
I would go so far as to say, that above foo function call would have a
different meaning if written with 'pg_class.*'.
select foo(pg_class.*) from pg_class;
Could be interpreted as calling a function foo with pg_class ncolumns
arguments of the corresponding types.
>
> select pg_class from pg_class;
Probably a valid interpretation would be if type pg_class or opaque had an
output function.
Andreas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2001-05-21 15:35:32 | Detecting readline in configure |
Previous Message | Patrick Welche | 2001-05-21 15:13:28 | shared library strangeness? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-05-21 15:47:54 | Re: AW: Fix for tablename in targetlist |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-05-20 23:15:03 | Re: class name in target list |