On Saturday, November 8, 2014, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > I'm confused too. The original example seemed to imagine that details > of a query (not the function, but the calling query) would be stored in > the catalogs, which is completely nuts. > > pg_proc already has provisions to remember the names of output parameters > of a function, but it seems like you want something else than that, only > it's not very clear what. Are you trying to say that you'd like to > represent the sort order of the output of a function? If so, you'd have > to add new columns to pg_proc for that, but I can't see why we'd represent > that information in terms of column names. A column number and a sort > operator would make more sense. > > Exactly. I would like to represent the sort order of the output.
Thanks for catching it, I really need to stop writing emails without drinking coffee... -- Regards, Atri *l'apprenant*
