> On 9 September 2017 at 23:33, Arthur Zakirov <a.zaki...@postgrespro.ru>
> PostgreSQL and documentation with the patch compiles without any errors.
> regression tests passed.

Thank you!

> But honestly I still cannot say that I agree with *_extract() and
> functions creation way. For example, there is no entry in pg_depend for
> ...
> =# drop function custom_subscripting_extract(internal);
> =# select data[0] from test_subscripting;
> ERROR:  function 0x55deb7911bfd returned NULL

Hm...I never thought about the feature in this way. When I was
experimenting I
also tried another approach for this - save to `refevalfunc` a function
pointer to an appropriate function. For simple situations it was ok, but
were questions about how it would work with node-related functions from
`outfuncs`/`copyfuncs` etc. Another my idea was to find out an actual
`refevalfunc` not at the time of a node creation but later on - this was
questionable since in this case we need to carry a lot of information with
a node
just for this sole purpose. Maybe you can suggest something else?

About dependencies between functions - as far as I understand one cannot
a `pg_depend` entry or any other kind of dependencies between custom
user-defined functions. So yes, looks like with the current approach the
solution would be to check in the `_parse` function that `_extract` and
`_assign` functions are existed (which is inconvenient).

> For example, there is no entry in pg_depend

Are there any other disadvantages of this approach?

Reply via email to