From: | Sergey Konoplev <gray(dot)ru(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Evan Martin <postgresql(at)realityexists(dot)net>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Drop all overloads of a function without knowing parameter types |
Date: | 2014-02-04 16:30:08 |
Message-ID: | CAL_0b1sDeS7p-fg-v6YX5SWQ=MSAaKBG3KB9tva2DbeBVBwmmA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 10:09 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> People periodically ask for extensions flavored more or less like this,
> but I'm suspicious of building any such thing into the core. There's too
> little commonality in the exact conditions they want to search on.
> Leaving it at the level of a scripting problem, as above, allows arbitrary
> customization of the search condition.
I understand the POV of both Evan and you here. However, I think that
there might be a good solution for this particular case - to allow
dropping functions by name only if it has the only signature, but if
there are 2 or more signatures then print an error specifying all the
forms of the function, eg.:
ERROR: Can not drop function 'foo' because it has more then one
signature: foo(integer), foo(text).
I am sure It would simplify life significantly.
--
Kind regards,
Sergey Konoplev
PostgreSQL Consultant and DBA
http://www.linkedin.com/in/grayhemp
+1 (415) 867-9984, +7 (901) 903-0499, +7 (988) 888-1979
gray(dot)ru(at)gmail(dot)com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2014-02-04 16:35:47 | Re: Drop all overloads of a function without knowing parameter types |
Previous Message | George Woodring | 2014-02-04 13:54:57 | Re: Server hanging with high CPU wait -- Checkpoint issue? |