Re: [HACKERS] Re: Number of parameters in a sql function

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: Number of parameters in a sql function
Date: 1999-05-09 17:40:05
Message-ID: 2462.926271605@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Looks like this was fixed, because we now generate an error:
> test=> create function klasd (int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int,
> int) returns int as 'asdf' language 'c';
> ERROR: Procedures cannot take more than 8 arguments

I'm not sure if this is a sufficient defense or not --- IIRC, there were
places in the parser that stuffed info into size-8 arrays without any
nearby check that no more than 8 items would be forthcoming. Offhand
the obvious try doesn't crash it:

regression=> select foo(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18);
ERROR: No such function 'foo' with the specified attributes

but I am hoping to go back and look more carefully.

regards, tom lane

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 1999-05-09 17:49:05 Re: [HACKERS] Problem with complex query
Previous Message Tom Lane 1999-05-09 17:31:52 Re: [HACKERS] Oops, I seem to have changed UNION's behavior