2008/8/6 Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 16:17 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote: >> 2008/8/5 Asko Oja <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> > postgres=# create or replace function pavel ( i_param text, status OUT int, >> > status_text OUT text ) returns record as $$ select 200::int, 'ok'::text; $$ >> > language sql; >> > CREATE FUNCTION >> > postgres=# create or replace function pavel ( i_param text, status OUT int, >> > status_text OUT text, more_text OUT text ) returns record as $$ select >> > 200::int, 'ok'::text, 'tom'::text; $$ language sql; >> > ERROR: cannot change return type of existing function >> > DETAIL: Row type defined by OUT parameters is different. >> > HINT: Use DROP FUNCTION first. >> > >> > On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 5:04 PM, Asko Oja <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >> > This is simply a bad, wrong, stupid way to do it. Why do you not use >> >> > CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION? >> >> I totally agree we should get this fixed first :) >> >> >> >> postgres=# create or replace function pavel ( i_param text, status OUT >> >> int, status_text OUT text ) returns record as $$ select 200::int, >> >> 'ok'::text; $$ language sql; >> >> ERROR: cannot change return type of existing function >> >> HINT: Use DROP FUNCTION first. >> >> >> >> you cannot change header of function. It's same as change C header of >> function without complete recompilation. > > SQL is not C. > > You don't have to recompile the whole SQL database when you add columns > to tables, so why should you need to do it, when you add a column to > table-returning function ? >
I thing, it's possible - but it's neccessary completly new dictionary with dependencies (some dependencies are dynamic - polymorphic functions) so it's dificult task. Pavel > -------------- > Hannu > > > -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
