Re: SQL: table function support
Neil Conway <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.db.postgresql.devel.patches |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <1213080176.12454.5.camel@goldbach> |
On Tue, 2008-06-10 at 06:42 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote: > internally is table functions implemenation identical with SRF. It's not the internals that I'm concerned about. > Semantically is far - user's doesn't specify return type (what is from > PostgreSQL), but specifies return table, what is more natural. What > more - for users is transparent chaotic joice betwen "SETOF RECORD" > for multicolumns sets and "SETOF type". Well, I'd just like to see some thought about how this *entire* feature ought to work, rather than just adding new knobs and syntax variants incrementally and seemingly at random. Just because it happens to be in the standard isn't really a compelling reason to make an overly-complex part of the system even more complicated, IMHO... -Neil -- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches