From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: returning SETOF RECORD |
Date: | 2014-07-15 14:20:53 |
Message-ID: | 16175.1405434053@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Dunno. Was hoping someone else had an idea. It'd certainly be nice
> to have some way of calling functions like this without specifying the
> shape of the return value, but I doubt there's a way to make that work
> without a lot of new infrastructure. For example, if a function could
> be called at the point where we need to know the record shape with a
> special flag that says "just tell me what kind of record you're going
> to return" and then called again at execution time to actually produce
> the results, that would be nifty.
I think you're confusing these functions with the kind that specify
their own output rowtype --- which we *can* handle, via a list of OUT
parameters. In these cases, the entire point is that the user has to
specify what SQL rowtype he wants out of the conversion.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-07-15 14:28:07 | Re: SSL compression info in psql header |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-07-15 14:17:22 | Re: Getting list of held lwlocks from debugger |