"Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> it can by more simple than I though. I need only one flag, and if its true > then I don't create language variables for OUT params. But I need one next
> column in pg_proc.

I thought you said this was just syntactic sugar for capabilities we
already had?

My mistake. I am sorry. I have to store somewhere flag. One bit, which signalise "don't use OUT arguments as function's parameters". Other is only game in parser.

> Currently a lot of columns in pg_proc is bool. What about one binary columns
> for other options? I hope so next versions can support autonomous
> transaction, which need flag too.

I think stored procedures of that sort aren't functions at all, and
probably don't belong in pg_proc.

Why not? Some people use "ugly" implementation of it in plperlu and DBI. pg_proc and related infrastructure works well. It miss only little bit bigger adaptability. I thing so can be interesting one general option byte, and one byte reservated for language handlers.

Pavel Stehule

Najdete si svou lasku a nove pratele na Match.com. http://www.msn.cz/

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
      subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
      message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to