Re: RFC for adding typmods to functions

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: RFC for adding typmods to functions
Date: 2009-12-03 16:02:45
Message-ID: 162867790912030802y70177720wf98cf0305b6e1ca2@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2009/12/3 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>:
> Pavel Stehule escribió:
>> 2009/11/18 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>:
>> > On ons, 2009-11-18 at 11:46 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> >> I am not sure if SQL standard is good inspiration in this case.
>> >
>> > I'm not sure either, but I think it's premature to make a conclusion
>> > about that without having checked at all.
>>
>> ok, I recheck SQL/PSM part again :)
>
> So, did this go anywhere?
>

I am read a documentation - and I am not sure. It is not part of
SQL/PSM. It is part of Foundation (SQL/Foundation) - see CD
9075-2:200x(E)
11.50 <SQL-invoked routine>. Important is section 18.d.

one parameter from all parameter list have to be unique (types are not
compatible)

Section 9.18 Data type identity speaking what are identity types, but
I am missing definition what are not compatible types.

so I if I respect 18.d, then I have not a functions foo(varchar(30))
and foo(varchar(40)).

But i am not native speaker and SQL standard is cryptographic for me.
Please, can somebody check it again.

Regards
Pavel Stehule

> --
> Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
> PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sam Mason 2009-12-03 16:03:32 Re: Catastrophic changes to PostgreSQL 8.4
Previous Message Robert Haas 2009-12-03 16:00:58 Re: patch - per-tablespace random_page_cost/seq_page_cost