From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: named parameters in SQL functions |
Date: | 2009-11-15 17:51:53 |
Message-ID: | 162867790911150951t6490486fwf1fd53d636ee1bda@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2009/11/15 Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>:
>
> At Tom's suggestion I am looking at allowing use of parameter names in SQL
> functions instead of requiring use of $1 etc. That raises the question of
> how we would disambiguate a parameter name from a column name. Essentially,
> ISTM, we could use some special marker such as @ (c.f. SQL Server) or :
> (c.f. ecpg) or else we could have some rule that says which name takes
> precedence. I think I prefer a special marker, other things being equal. Is
> there a standard on this?
what about $name ?
Personally I prefer :name, but this colidates with psql local variables :(
Pavel
>
> cheers
>
> andrew
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-11-15 17:53:45 | Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby |
Previous Message | Andrew Chernow | 2009-11-15 17:49:03 | Re: named parameters in SQL functions |