Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments
Date: 2021-05-25 11:21:34
Message-ID: cfc3c0c0-79c5-587a-68c2-651413899868@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 24.05.21 02:01, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> I think we ought to fix this so that OUT-only arguments are ignored
>> when calling from SQL not plpgsql.
>
> I'm working on a patch to make it act that way. I've got some issues
> yet to fix with named arguments (which seem rather undertested BTW,
> since the patch is passing check-world even though I know it will
> crash instantly on cases with CALL+named-args+out-only-args).
>
> Before I spend too much time on it though, I wanted to mention that
> it includes undoing 2453ea142's decision to include OUT arguments
> in pg_proc.proargtypes for procedures (but not for any other kind of
> routine). I thought that was a terrible decision and I'm very happy
> to revert it, but is anyone likely to complain loudly?

I don't understand why you want to change this. The argument resolution
of CALL is specified in the SQL standard; we shouldn't just make up our
own system.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2021-05-25 11:32:37 Re: Add ZSON extension to /contrib/
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2021-05-25 11:20:01 Re: Assertion failure while streaming toasted data