| From: | Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)endpoint(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL::PLPerl::Call - Simple interface for calling SQL functions from PostgreSQL PL/Perl |
| Date: | 2010-02-18 09:35:16 |
| Message-ID: | 20100218093516.GX373@timac.local |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 10:30:03AM -0800, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Feb 17, 2010, at 4:28 AM, Tim Bunce wrote:
>
> >> Yes, but if it's a variadic function, I suspect that it won't often be
> >> called with the same number of args. So you'd potentially end up
> >> caching a lot of extra stuff that would never be used again.
> >
> > Potentially. Patches welcome!
>
> GitHub. ;-P
http://github.com/timbunce/posgtresql-plperl-call
> > Umm, perhaps F->funcname(@args), or PG->funcname(@args), or ... ?
> >
> > Anyone got any better suggestions?
>
> PG is good. Or maybe DB?
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 08:26:51AM +0000, Richard Huxton wrote:
>
> It's a module whose only use is embedded in a DB called PG - not
> sure those carry any extra info. It also treads on the toes of
> "PG->not_a_function" should such a beast be needed.
>
> I like "F->funcname" or "FN->funcname" myself.
Thanks. I quite like FN.
Anybody else want to express an opinion on the color if this bikeshed
before I repaint it?
Tim.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2010-02-18 09:43:41 | Re: A thought: should we run pgindent now? |
| Previous Message | Zdenek Kotala | 2010-02-18 08:58:41 | Re: codlin_month is up and complain - PL/Python crash |