From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Jan-Peter(dot)Seifert(at)gmx(dot)de |
Cc: | raf <raf(at)raf(dot)org>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: getting 'full' names of functions? |
Date: | 2009-03-05 18:45:17 |
Message-ID: | 8331.1236278717@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Jan-Peter(dot)Seifert(at)gmx(dot)de writes:
> Hello raf,
>>> Easier is just
>>> select oid::regprocedure from pg_proc where <whatever>
>> note that this method doesn't produce a complete function
>> signature. the precision and scale of numerics are not
>> included in the output. hopefully, that won't matter for
>> your needs.
> Oh. So functions expecting e.g. numeric(5,2) as argument wouldn't be
listed correctly? Is this going to be fixed then?
No, because it's not broken. Precision/scale of numerics aren't
relevant to function signatures. A function can take or return
a numeric, full stop --- it doesn't matter what the precision is.
The same goes for other type modifiers such as varchar maxlength.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ray Stell | 2009-03-05 19:52:49 | Re: standby waiting for what? |
Previous Message | Jan-Peter.Seifert | 2009-03-05 16:41:49 | Re: getting 'full' names of functions? |