Re: SQL-Invoked Procedures for 8.1 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim C. Nasby
Subject Re: SQL-Invoked Procedures for 8.1
Date
Msg-id 20041021171105.GF68407@decibel.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SQL-Invoked Procedures for 8.1  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Responses Re: SQL-Invoked Procedures for 8.1
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 09:17:23PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> And, not that I think about it, I have a way to support DEFAULT params within 
> the context of overloading.  Let me muse it over and I'll get back to you.
Yes, but using overloading to implement defaults is a pain. Imagine how
much you need to overload to have 5 default arguments; that equates to 4
stub functions/prodecudes. In the case of adding a single parameter it's
not that bad, but it becomes very onerous if you're trying to provide
default values for a bunch of parameters.
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant               decibel@decibel.org 
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828

Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Why frequently updated tables are an issue
Next
From: Dennis Bjorklund
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #1290: Default value and ALTER...TYPE