Re: Proposal: variant of regclass - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Yugo Nagata
Subject Re: Proposal: variant of regclass
Date
Msg-id 20140114162820.89870fa8.nagata@sraoss.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Proposal: variant of regclass  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Proposal: variant of regclass
Re: Proposal: variant of regclass
Re: Proposal: variant of regclass
List pgsql-hackers
Here is the patch to implement to_regclass, to_regproc, to_regoper,
and to_regtype. They are new functions similar to regclass, regproc,
regoper, and regtype except that if requested object is not found,
returns InvalidOid, rather than raises an error.

On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 12:10:56 +0100
Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote:

> 2013/12/31 Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org>
>
> > > On 12/31/2013 02:38 AM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > >> Before proceeding the work, I would like to make sure that followings
> > >> are complete list of new functions. Inside parentheses are
> > >> corresponding original functions.
> > >>
> > >> toregproc (regproc)
> > >> toregoper (regoper)
> > >> toregclass (regclass)
> > >> toregtype (regtype)
> > >
> > > Pardon the bikeshedding, but those are hard to read for me.  I would
> > > prefer to go with the to_timestamp() model and add an underscore to
> > > those names.
> >
> > I have no problem with adding "to_". Objection?
> >
>
> I like to_reg* too
>
> Regards
>
> Pavel
>
>
> >
> > Best regards,
> > --
> > Tatsuo Ishii
> > SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
> > English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
> > Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
> > To make changes to your subscription:
> > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
> >


--
Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeevan Chalke
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] surprising to_timestamp behavior
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: variant of regclass