Re: Closing some 8.4 open items

From: Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Grzegorz Jaskiewicz <gj(at)pointblue(dot)com(dot)pl>
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Closing some 8.4 open items
Date: 2009-04-11 12:33:16
Message-ID: e08cc0400904110533l46526f12l198d3a016b4294bb@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2009/4/11 Grzegorz Jaskiewicz <gj(at)pointblue(dot)com(dot)pl>:
>
> On 11 Apr 2009, at 08:01, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
>
>> 2009/4/11 David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 03:48:33PM +0900, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, but all the window functions are stored in pg_proc.
>>>
>>> So are aggregate functions, and they have their own separate way of
>>> being addressed in psql :)
>>>
>>
>> Aggregate functions are stored in pg_aggregate. And they are
>> combinations of plain function which is stored in pg_proc.
>
>
> Maybe trigger functions should be displayed separately too than ?

You don't catch the point. The aggregate entries in pg_proc have
prosrc = 'aggregate_dummy', which means they're dummy and the entities
are stored in pg_aggregate. Triggers in pg_proc are dummy? No, they
are actually plain functions with trigger return type.

Regards,

--
Hitoshi Harada

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Grzegorz Jaskiewicz 2009-04-11 12:39:47 Re: Closing some 8.4 open items
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2009-04-11 10:34:07 Re: Allow COMMENT ON to accept an expression rather than just a string