Has it been resubmitted with issues attended to? If it has, I missed it.
If not, why should someone else waste time on something so broken that
it produced a stringified perl hashref on output? It should never have
gone back in the queue IMNSHO.
cheers
andrew
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Would someone review this. It is in the patches_hold queue:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I think it has to wait to 8.3. It's a complete mess that was submitted
unheralded at the last moment. Pavel needs to get into the habit of
submitting ideas first, not just patches. And there must be proper
documentation and working regression tests.
cheers
andrew
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Uh, were are we in fixing/reviewing this?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I wrote:
Pavel Stehule wrote:
Hello,
I send two small patches. First does conversion from perl to
postgresql array in OUT parameters. Second patch allow hash form
output from procedures with one OUT argument.
I will try to review these in the next 2 weeks unless someone beats me
to it.
I have reviewed this lightly, as committed by Bruce, and have some
concerns. Unfortunately, the deathof my main workstation has cost me
much of the time I intended to use for a more thorough review, so there
may well be more issues than are outlined here.
First, it is completely undocumented.
Second, this comment is at best confusing:
/* if value is ref on array do to pg string array conversion */
Third, it appears to assume that we will have names for all OUT params. But
names are optional, as I understand it. Arguably, we should be treating the
returns positionally, and thus return an arrayref when there are OYT params,
not a hashref, and ignore the names - after all, all perl function args are
nameless, in fact, even if you use a naming convention to refer to them.
Fourth, I don't understand the change: "allow hash form output from procedures with
one OUT argument." That seems very non-orthogonal, and I can't see any good reason
for it.
Lastly, if you look at the expected output as committed,it appears to have been
prepared without being actually examined, for example:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION test05(OUT a varchar) AS $$
return {a=>'ahoj'};
$$ LANGUAGE plperl;
SELECT '05' AS i,a FROM test05();
i | a
----+-----------------
05 | HASH(0x8558f9c)
(1 row)
what???
And now that I look I see every buildfarm box broken on PLCheck. That's no
surprise at all.
The conversation regarding these features appears only to have started on July
28th, which was probably much too late given some of the issues. Unless we can
solve these issues very fast I would be inclined to say this should be tabled
for 8.3. I think this is a fairly good illustration of the danger of springing
a feature, largely undiscussed, on the community just about freeze time.
cheers
andrew
---------------------------(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