Teodor Sigaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > May I eliminate SETOF from Typename and leave it > only for RETURNS?
Why do you want to? I think the reason it's in Typename is the assumption that in future we would try to extend the applicability of SETOF, not restrict it. For instance I can see reasons for wanting SETOF on a function's input parameter (to pass it a whole table or select result in one call). regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org