Re: TABLE-function patch vs plpgsql - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: TABLE-function patch vs plpgsql
Date
Msg-id 10356.1216358359@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: TABLE-function patch vs plpgsql  ("Pavel Stehule" <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: TABLE-function patch vs plpgsql  ("Pavel Stehule" <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Pavel Stehule" <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
> Maybe we can use some well defined implicit record, maybe NEW (or
> RESULT, ROW_RESULT, ROW, TABLE_ROW, ...) like trigger - some like

That sounds like exactly the sort of kluge-solution that I didn't
want to get involved with ...

Anyway, the core feature is in, and we still have several months
before 8.4 feature freeze to debate how plpgsql ought to interact
with it.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Pavel Stehule"
Date:
Subject: Re: TABLE-function patch vs plpgsql
Next
From: "Jonah H. Harris"
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH]-hash index improving