Re: Reserved words and named function parameters

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Reserved words and named function parameters
Date: 2004-01-13 08:19:15
Message-ID: 4003AA03.5090301@familyhealth.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Any opinions which to do, or alternate proposals? I'm leaning
> slightly to #2, since I doubt anyone is trying to use "IN" as
> a function name, but ...

One addition. The information_schema.parameters view will need to be
updated to reflect parameter names.

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.4/static/infoschema-parameters.html

Quote: "Always null, since PostgreSQL does not support named parameters"

Chris

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Claudio Natoli 2004-01-13 09:44:11 Re: LWLock/ShmemIndex startup question
Previous Message Claudio Natoli 2004-01-13 06:37:09 Re: LWLock/ShmemIndex startup question