Something like this,
Everything must be done on call, due to polymorphic signatures, this
can be kept in short living cache, but bear in mind user can alter
procedure in meantime.
When JDBC driver will detect if procedure call statement is created.
1. Determine procedure oid - how?
On Feb17, 2011, at 01:14 , Oliver Jowett wrote:
Any suggestions about how the JDBC driver can express the query to get
the behavior that it wants? Specifically, the driver wants to call a
particular function with N OUT or INOUT parameters (and maybe some other
IN parameters too) and get a
On Feb17, 2011, at 10:30 , rsmogura wrote:
When JDBC driver will detect if procedure call statement is created.
1. Determine procedure oid - how? procedures may have not qualified name. Is
any function on backend that will deal with schema search path? You may need
to pass procedure
2011/2/17 Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org:
On Feb17, 2011, at 10:30 , rsmogura wrote:
When JDBC driver will detect if procedure call statement is created.
1. Determine procedure oid - how? procedures may have not qualified name. Is
any function on backend that will deal with schema search path?
Yes new node should be created and added for 8.x and 9.x releases...
On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 10:53:19 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2011/2/17 Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org:
On Feb17, 2011, at 10:30 , rsmogura wrote:
When JDBC driver will detect if procedure call statement is
created.
1. Determine
Lukas Eder wrote:
The result set meta data correctly state that there are 6 OUT columns.
But only the first 2 are actually fetched (because of a nested UDT)...
The data mangling was just a plpgsql syntactic issue, wasn't it?
Oliver
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
Maybe change in backend to treat complex types marked in relation as
COMPLEX in same way as scalar values is solution, actually I don't know.
This can be determined by GUC variable so every one can be happy :)
On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 23:08:13 +1300, Oliver Jowett wrote:
Lukas Eder wrote:
The
Florian Pflug wrote:
On Feb17, 2011, at 01:14 , Oliver Jowett wrote:
Any suggestions about how the JDBC driver can express the query to get
the behavior that it wants? Specifically, the driver wants to call a
particular function with N OUT or INOUT parameters (and maybe some other
IN parameters
2011/2/17 rsmogura rsmog...@softperience.eu:
Yes new node should be created and added for 8.x and 9.x releases...
what node?
Pavel
On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 10:53:19 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2011/2/17 Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org:
On Feb17, 2011, at 10:30 , rsmogura wrote:
When JDBC driver
Yes, but driver checks number of declared out parameters and number of
resulted parameters (even check types of those), to prevent programming
errors.
On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 23:15:07 +1300, Oliver Jowett wrote:
Florian Pflug wrote:
On Feb17, 2011, at 01:14 , Oliver Jowett wrote:
Any suggestions
On 17/02/11 23:18, rsmogura wrote:
Yes, but driver checks number of declared out parameters and number of
resulted parameters (even check types of those), to prevent programming
errors.
And..?
Oliver
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 00:06:22 +1300, Oliver Jowett wrote:
On 17/02/11 23:18, rsmogura wrote:
Yes, but driver checks number of declared out parameters and number
of
resulted parameters (even check types of those), to prevent
programming
errors.
And..?
Oliver
And it will throw exception
On 18/02/11 00:37, rsmogura wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 00:06:22 +1300, Oliver Jowett wrote:
On 17/02/11 23:18, rsmogura wrote:
Yes, but driver checks number of declared out parameters and number of
resulted parameters (even check types of those), to prevent programming
errors.
And..?
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 00:44:07 +1300, Oliver Jowett wrote:
On 18/02/11 00:37, rsmogura wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 00:06:22 +1300, Oliver Jowett wrote:
On 17/02/11 23:18, rsmogura wrote:
Yes, but driver checks number of declared out parameters and
number of
resulted parameters (even check types
On 18/02/11 00:52, rsmogura wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 00:44:07 +1300, Oliver Jowett wrote:
On 18/02/11 00:37, rsmogura wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 00:06:22 +1300, Oliver Jowett wrote:
On 17/02/11 23:18, rsmogura wrote:
Yes, but driver checks number of declared out parameters and number of
On Feb17, 2011, at 11:15 , Oliver Jowett wrote:
Florian Pflug wrote:
On Feb17, 2011, at 01:14 , Oliver Jowett wrote:
Any suggestions about how the JDBC driver can express the query to get
the behavior that it wants? Specifically, the driver wants to call a
particular function with N OUT or
On 18/02/11 01:08, Florian Pflug wrote:
Well, the JDBC driver does know how many OUT parameters there are before
execution happens, so it could theoretically do something different for 1
OUT vs. many OUT parameters.
Right, I had forgotten that JDBC must be told about OUT parameter with
snip
testdb=# CREATE FUNCTION p_enhance_address4 (address OUT
u_address_type) AS $$ BEGIN address := (SELECT t_author.address FROM
t_author WHERE first_name = 'George'); END; $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql;
CREATE FUNCTION
testdb=# SELECT * FROM p_enhance_address4();
street | zip |
2011/2/17 Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org
On Feb17, 2011, at 01:14 , Oliver Jowett wrote:
Any suggestions about how the JDBC driver can express the query to get
the behavior that it wants? Specifically, the driver wants to call a
particular function with N OUT or INOUT parameters (and maybe
Hi Oliver
There are two problems.
The first problem is a plpgsql problem in that particular function. It's
broken regardless of how you call it. Here's how to fix it [...]
Thanks for insisting! I missed that fact. In the end, it looked like the
same error, but you're right about the plpgsql
I'm not trying to fix the signature. I want exactly that signature. I want
to return 1 UDT as an OUT parameter from a function.
Somewhere between JDBC and the database, this signature is lost, and JDBC's
internal code tells me that I have to bind 6 OUT parameters, instead of 1.
It happens to be
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:30 AM, Lukas Eder lukas.e...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not trying to fix the signature. I want exactly that signature. I want
to return 1 UDT as an OUT parameter from a function.
Somewhere between JDBC and the database, this signature is lost, and JDBC's
internal code
On 17/02/11 00:58, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:30 AM, Lukas Eder lukas.e...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not trying to fix the signature. I want exactly that signature. I want
to return 1 UDT as an OUT parameter from a function.
Somewhere between JDBC and the database, this signature
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 7:07 AM, Lukas Eder lukas.e...@gmail.com wrote:
So what should I do? File a bug to the main Postgres mailing list? Or just
not support that feature?
Well, I thought you just said you'd ruled out a PG bug?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 7:03 AM, Oliver Jowett oli...@opencloud.com wrote:
On 17/02/11 00:58, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:30 AM, Lukas Eder lukas.e...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not trying to fix the signature. I want exactly that signature. I want
to return 1 UDT as an OUT
If I may give some suggestion, I was tried to investigate this, and
maybe some this will help
When you create procedure with out parameters then return type of this
is implicit calculated and may be
record or base type (if exactly one out param is defined).
In many places I saw comparison of
On 17/02/11 01:10, Robert Haas wrote:
If you do SELECT function_with_one_out_parameter() rather than SELECT
* FROM function_with_one_out_parameter(), you'll get just one
argument. Does that help at all?
Unfortunately, not really, because it doesn't work for cases where
there's more than one
That was my opinion, but you're saying that JDBC is not the cause either?
2011/2/16 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 7:07 AM, Lukas Eder lukas.e...@gmail.com wrote:
So what should I do? File a bug to the main Postgres mailing list? Or
just
not support that feature?
Hmm, good point. I should try that. I have only tried these syntaxes:
connection.prepareStatement(select * from p_enhance_address2());
connection.prepareCall({ call p_enhance_address2(?) }); // with an
output parameter registered
So what should I do? File a bug to the main Postgres mailing list? Or just
not support that feature?
2011/2/16 Oliver Jowett oli...@opencloud.com
On 17/02/11 00:58, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:30 AM, Lukas Eder lukas.e...@gmail.com
wrote:
I'm not trying to fix the
On Feb16, 2011, at 13:43 , Oliver Jowett wrote:
Anyway, it's a bit counterintuitive that
SELECT * FROM f($1,$2) AS RESULT
where f() takes two OUT parameters always returns two columns, but
SELECT * FROM f($1) AS RESULT
might return any number of columns! Is that really the correct
Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org writes:
Hm, I've browsed through the code and it seems that the current behaviour
was implemented on purpose.
Yes, it's 100% intentional. The idea is to allow function authors to
use OUT-parameter notation (in particular, the convention of assigning
to a named
On 17/02/11 04:23, Tom Lane wrote:
Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org writes:
Hm, I've browsed through the code and it seems that the current behaviour
was implemented on purpose.
Yes, it's 100% intentional. The idea is to allow function authors to
use OUT-parameter notation (in particular, the
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Lukas Eder lukas.e...@gmail.com wrote:
I had tried that before. That doesn't seem to change anything. JDBC still
expects 6 OUT parameters, instead of just 1...
Oh, hrm. I thought you were trying to fix the return value, rather
than the signature.
I am not sure
I had tried that before. That doesn't seem to change anything. JDBC still
expects 6 OUT parameters, instead of just 1...
2011/2/11 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 2:39 AM, Lukas Eder lukas.e...@gmail.com wrote:
So what you're suggesting is that the plpgsql code is
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 2:39 AM, Lukas Eder lukas.e...@gmail.com wrote:
So what you're suggesting is that the plpgsql code is causing the issues?
Are there any indications about how I could re-write this code? The
important thing for me is to have the aforementioned signature of the
plpgsql
Hi,
I don't know if this is a bug, but at least I haven't found any clear
statement in documentation about; this should be wrote with big and bold
letters.
In any way I think this is bug or big inconsistency, because of, as was
stated in previous mail
test=# CREATE FUNCTION
Here, we've somehow got the first two fields of u_address_type - street
and
zip - squashed together into one column named 'street', and all the other
columns nulled out.
I think this is the old problem of PL/pgsql having two forms of SELECT
INTO. You can either say:
SELECT col1,
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:00 AM, Oliver Jowett oli...@opencloud.com wrote:
However, doing the same via a plpgsql function with an OUT parameter
produces something completely mangled:
test_udt=# CREATE FUNCTION p_enhance_address2 (address OUT u_address_type)
AS $$ BEGIN SELECT
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 5:12 AM, rsmogura rsmog...@softperience.eu wrote:
Dear hackers :) Could you look at this thread from General.
---
I say the backend if you have one row type output result treats it as the
full output result, it's really bad if you use STRUCT types (in your example
you
On 17/01/11 17:27, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 5:12 AM, rsmogurarsmog...@softperience.eu wrote:
Dear hackers :) Could you look at this thread from General.
---
I say the backend if you have one row type output result treats it as the
full output result, it's really bad if you
Dear hackers :) Could you look at this thread from General.
---
I say the backend if you have one row type output result treats it as
the full output result, it's really bad if you use STRUCT types (in your
example you see few columns, but this should be one column!). I think
backend should
42 matches
Mail list logo
