| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Rushabh Lathia" <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, rushabh(dot)lathia(at)enterprisedb(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: Function with default value not replacing old definition of the function |
| Date: | 2008-12-11 19:24:58 |
| Message-ID: | 1A12792B-109A-4E3F-BF21-6F68599D73CB@hi-media.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Le 11 déc. 08 à 16:22, Tom Lane a écrit :
> Yeah, we already bit this bullet with variadic functions --- if you
> have
> myfunc(int, float)
> myfunc(int, variadic float[])
> then it's ambiguous which one should be used for call "myfunc(11,
> 12.5)".
> The sanest answer I can see is "so, don't do that".
Is there any warning level message at CREATE FUNCTION time for the
user/dba to know he's doing something... border line, almost shooting
himself in the foot?
I'd really welcome such an error message as a reminder to consider
seriously such a choice, which would not be though out in lot of cases
I suppose.
Regards,
- --
dim
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iEYEARECAAYFAklBaQoACgkQlBXRlnbh1bn0VgCeJB+cBxX1tg1Qgn+MYaW6hS8O
ZX8An3niWwN4lFIbwuBZJ8mKgTBThm6o
=d4lp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vladimir Sitnikov | 2008-12-11 19:31:25 | Re: benchmarking the query planner |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-12-11 19:06:32 | Re: benchmarking the query planner |