From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: WIP: hooking parser |
Date: | 2009-02-13 08:39:27 |
Message-ID: | 499531BF.3020907@gmx.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>> I think what you want here is some way to define a function that takes an
>> arbitrary number of arguments of arbitrary type and let the function figure
>> everything out. I see no reason why this can't be a variant on CREATE
>> FUNCTION, except that of course you need to figure out some API and function
>> resolution details.
>
> We've already got "variadic any" functions --- the problem is to tell
> the parser what the function's result type will be, given a particular
> parameter list. I agree that hooking transformExpr is not exactly the
> most ideal way to attack that from a performance or complexity
> standpoint.
What is the defined return type logic for the decode() function anyway?
If you want the full CASE-like resolution logic, it might be very hard
to fit that into a general system.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2009-02-13 08:43:40 | Re: WIP: hooking parser |
Previous Message | John Lister | 2009-02-13 08:20:03 | Database corruption help |