| From: | Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Function parameter names |
| Date: | 2003-11-23 20:09:23 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0311232103010.29118-100000@zigo.dhs.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> I see absolutely no need for the call path to do anything with this
> stuff before it reaches the language handler. All the handlers fetch
> the pg_proc tuple anyway
Even better then!
I've not gotten so far that i've looked much at that code. What I have
implemented so far is the parser and the extra nodes needed in the Syntax
tree, and I've added a field to pg_proc of currently the wrong type. The
next step for me is to find out how the arrays work inside the backend.
It's all new code for me so it takes a little more time then what it would
otherwise. On the bright side is that the code in pg is fairly easy to
read (but there is a lot).
--
/Dennis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andreas Pflug | 2003-11-23 21:21:12 | Re: Anyone working on pg_dump dependency ordering? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-11-23 20:02:05 | Re: initdb mkdir_p() doesn't work |