From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Gevik Babakhani <pgdev(at)xs4all(dot)nl> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: usability of pg_get_function_arguments |
Date: | 2009-05-26 16:48:55 |
Message-ID: | 13893.1243356535@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Gevik Babakhani <pgdev(at)xs4all(dot)nl> writes:
>> I experimented with your example and noticed that pg_get_expr requires a
>> hack --- it insists on having a relation OID argument, because all
>> previous use-cases for it involved expressions that might possibly refer
>> to a particular table. So you have to do something like
>>
>> regression=# select pg_get_expr(proargdefaults,'pg_proc'::regclass) from pg_proc where proname='f13';
>> pg_get_expr
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 10, 'hello'::character varying, '2009-01-01 00:00:00'::timestamp without time zone, 'comma here ,'::character varying
>> (1 row)
>>
>>
> Unfortunately, there is no way to know to which argument(s) the values
> above belongs to.
The last ones --- you can only omit arguments from the right, so it
makes no sense to allow a nonconsecutive set of defaults.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2009-05-26 17:21:34 | Re: generic options for explain |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-05-26 16:40:31 | Re: problem with memory |