| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs |
| Date: | 2012-12-16 18:56:55 |
| Message-ID: | 50CE1977.9050508@2ndQuadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/16/2012 07:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>>> On further thought the function name should just be what it is defined
>>> in postgresql, like this
>>> CREATE FUNCTION foo(a,b,c) AS $$
>>> def foo(a,b,c):
> BTW, how well will that play with overloaded function names? I don't
> particularly care for saying that PL/Python fails if you overload a
> function name across multiple schemas or argument lists ...
Currently each pl/python function gets compiled in its own python
module namespace, so this is not be a problem .
--------------
Hannu
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2012-12-16 19:01:11 | Re: multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-12-16 18:44:20 | Re: multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs |