Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments
Date
Msg-id 1f5997a4-aba5-2f91-f5a4-190c0aef005d@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments
List pgsql-hackers
On 5/23/21 8:01 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> I think we ought to fix this so that OUT-only arguments are ignored
>> when calling from SQL not plpgsql.
> I'm working on a patch to make it act that way.  I've got some issues
> yet to fix with named arguments (which seem rather undertested BTW,
> since the patch is passing check-world even though I know it will
> crash instantly on cases with CALL+named-args+out-only-args).
>
> Before I spend too much time on it though, I wanted to mention that
> it includes undoing 2453ea142's decision to include OUT arguments
> in pg_proc.proargtypes for procedures (but not for any other kind of
> routine).  I thought that was a terrible decision and I'm very happy
> to revert it, but is anyone likely to complain loudly?
>
>             


Possibly, Will take a look. IIRC we have based some other things on this.


cheers


andrew


--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE .. DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY
Next
From: Andrey Borodin
Date:
Subject: Re: rand48 replacement