| From: | Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Table as argument in postgres function |
| Date: | 2019-05-21 07:04:07 |
| Message-ID: | CADkLM=c+xaexd8LmfBmqMJ_M4pDQj=YFk2Xcd1hzQtOwqebk9w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
>
>
>> Is there anything preventing us from having the planner resolve object
>> names from strings?
>>
>
> The basic problem is fact so when you use PREPARE, EXECUTE protocol, you
> has not parameters in planning time.
>
I agree that it defeats PREPARE as it is currently implemented with
PQprepare(), and it would never be meaningful to have a query plan that
hasn't finalized which objects are involved.
But could it be made to work with PQexecParams(), where the parameter
values are already provided?
Could we make a version of PQprepare() that takes an extra array of
paramValues for object names that must be supplied at prepare-time?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Haribabu Kommi | 2019-05-21 07:10:15 | Re: PG 12 draft release notes |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2019-05-21 07:00:25 | Re: VACUUM fails to parse 0 and 1 as boolean value |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2019-05-21 07:13:46 | Re: Table as argument in postgres function |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2019-05-20 06:03:46 | Re: Table as argument in postgres function |