| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Schema version management |
| Date: | 2012-07-05 16:34:01 |
| Message-ID: | 1341505885-sup-9542@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Christopher Browne's message of jue jul 05 12:10:09 -0400 2012:
> I wound up expanding the function arguments and using function + args
> as the name. That leads to a risk of rather long names for functions,
> but there aren't many other ways possible.
Well, maybe not many, but you don't need many, only some. You could
stringify the list of arguments and use a hash of the string. That's
also unambiguous and the length is constrained, regardless of the number
of args.
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2012-07-05 16:41:38 | Re: enhanced error fields |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-07-05 16:30:08 | Re: PG9.2 and FDW query planning. |