From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Sergey Konoplev <gray(dot)ru(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Evan Martin <postgresql(at)realityexists(dot)net>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Drop all overloads of a function without knowing parameter types |
Date: | 2014-02-04 16:35:47 |
Message-ID: | 20140204163547.GN10723@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Sergey Konoplev escribió:
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 10:09 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > People periodically ask for extensions flavored more or less like this,
> > but I'm suspicious of building any such thing into the core. There's too
> > little commonality in the exact conditions they want to search on.
> > Leaving it at the level of a scripting problem, as above, allows arbitrary
> > customization of the search condition.
>
> I understand the POV of both Evan and you here. However, I think that
> there might be a good solution for this particular case - to allow
> dropping functions by name only if it has the only signature, but if
> there are 2 or more signatures then print an error specifying all the
> forms of the function, eg.:
>
> ERROR: Can not drop function 'foo' because it has more then one
> signature: foo(integer), foo(text).
But that doesn't solve Evan's request. He would want both functions
gone, not an error.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sergey Konoplev | 2014-02-04 16:40:33 | Re: Drop all overloads of a function without knowing parameter types |
Previous Message | Sergey Konoplev | 2014-02-04 16:30:08 | Re: Drop all overloads of a function without knowing parameter types |