Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2013-01-02 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 7:09 AM, Hannu Krosing ha...@krosing.net wrote: thus CREATE FUNCTION foo(a int,b int, c text) would create module plpy.modules.foo_int4_int4_text I don't know much of anything about Python, but keep in mind that types can be renamed. It seems like that could break

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2013-01-02 Thread Hitoshi Harada
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/12/28 Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net: On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 16:34 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Yes, this would be a good solution for some applications, but the only way I can think of to manage the

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-28 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 16:34 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Yes, this would be a good solution for some applications, but the only way I can think of to manage the compatibility issue is to invent some function attribute system like CREATE FUNCTION ... OPTIONS (call_convention 'xyz') An

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-28 Thread Pavel Stehule
2012/12/28 Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net: On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 16:34 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Yes, this would be a good solution for some applications, but the only way I can think of to manage the compatibility issue is to invent some function attribute system like CREATE FUNCTION

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-28 Thread Hannu Krosing
On 12/28/2012 09:15 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 16:34 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Yes, this would be a good solution for some applications, but the only way I can think of to manage the compatibility issue is to invent some function attribute system like CREATE

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-28 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 12/28/2012 03:15 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 16:34 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Yes, this would be a good solution for some applications, but the only way I can think of to manage the compatibility issue is to invent some function attribute system like CREATE

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-28 Thread Tom Lane
On 12/28/2012 09:15 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: An alternative that has some amount of precedent in the Python world would be to use comment pragmas, like this: ... This way we could get this done fairly easily without any new infrastructure outside the language handler. +1 for not

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-28 Thread Hannu Krosing
On 12/28/2012 09:15 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 16:34 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Yes, this would be a good solution for some applications, but the only way I can think of to manage the compatibility issue is to invent some function attribute system like CREATE

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-28 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 12/28/12 7:09 AM, Hannu Krosing wrote: Maybe just export the function with the same name as is defined in CREATE FUNCTION ? And in case we do want to override it, call it CREATE FUNCTION foo(a int,b int, c text) AS $$ # plpython: module modulename import x,y,z def foo(a,b,c):

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-17 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 12/16/12 1:20 PM, Hannu Krosing wrote: I was going to suggest some special function name to be pulled out of code passed to CREATE FUNCTION in line with CREATE FUNCTION foo(a,b,c) AS $$ import x from __future__ import nex_cool_feature def helper_function(x):

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-17 Thread Pavel Stehule
2012/12/17 Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net: On 12/16/12 1:20 PM, Hannu Krosing wrote: I was going to suggest some special function name to be pulled out of code passed to CREATE FUNCTION in line with CREATE FUNCTION foo(a,b,c) AS $$ import x from __future__ import

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-17 Thread Hannu Krosing
On 12/17/2012 10:34 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 12/16/12 1:20 PM, Hannu Krosing wrote: I was going to suggest some special function name to be pulled out of code passed to CREATE FUNCTION in line with CREATE FUNCTION foo(a,b,c) AS $$ import x from __future__ import

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-17 Thread Tom Lane
Hannu Krosing ha...@krosing.net writes: On 12/17/2012 10:34 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Yes, this would be a good solution for some applications, but the only way I can think of to manage the compatibility issue is to invent some function attribute system like CREATE FUNCTION ... OPTIONS

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-16 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hello I understand to motivation, but proposed syntax is not too intuitive and robust can you do it in one function and call import only in first call? Regards Pavel 2012/12/16 Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net: I'm going to use PL/Python as an example, but I would also like to know if this

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-16 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On Sun, 2012-12-16 at 10:20 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: Hello I understand to motivation, but proposed syntax is not too intuitive and robust can you do it in one function and call import only in first call? Sometimes, but it's even less intuitive and robust. -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-16 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: When you do CREATE FUNCTION foo(...) ... LANGUAGE plpythonu AS $$ source code here $$; it internally creates a source file that contains --- def __plpython_procedure_foo_12345(): source code here --- It would be useful to be able to do

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-16 Thread Hannu Krosing
On 12/16/2012 07:37 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: I'm going to use PL/Python as an example, but I would also like to know if this could be applicable to other languages. When you do CREATE FUNCTION foo(...) ... LANGUAGE plpythonu AS $$ source code here $$; it internally creates a source file

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-16 Thread Hannu Krosing
On 12/16/2012 07:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: When you do CREATE FUNCTION foo(...) ... LANGUAGE plpythonu AS $$ source code here $$; it internally creates a source file that contains --- def __plpython_procedure_foo_12345(): source code here --- It would

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-16 Thread Hannu Krosing
On 12/16/2012 07:20 PM, Hannu Krosing wrote: On 12/16/2012 07:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: When you do CREATE FUNCTION foo(...) ... LANGUAGE plpythonu AS $$ source code here $$; it internally creates a source file that contains --- def

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-16 Thread Tom Lane
Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com writes: On further thought the function name should just be what it is defined in postgresql, like this CREATE FUNCTION foo(a,b,c) AS $$ import x from __future__ import nex_cool_feature def helper_function(x): ...

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-16 Thread Tom Lane
Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com writes: On further thought the function name should just be what it is defined in postgresql, like this CREATE FUNCTION foo(a,b,c) AS $$ def foo(a,b,c): BTW, how well will that play with overloaded function names? I don't particularly care for

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-16 Thread Hannu Krosing
On 12/16/2012 07:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com writes: On further thought the function name should just be what it is defined in postgresql, like this CREATE FUNCTION foo(a,b,c) AS $$ def foo(a,b,c): BTW, how well will that play with overloaded function

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-16 Thread Hannu Krosing
On 12/16/2012 07:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Hannu Krosing ha...@2ndquadrant.com writes: On further thought the function name should just be what it is defined in postgresql, like this CREATE FUNCTION foo(a,b,c) AS $$ import x from __future__ import nex_cool_feature def

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-16 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 12/16/2012 01:37 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: So in practice this might look like this: CREATE FUNCTION foo(...) ... LANGUAGE plpythonu AS $$ import x import y $$, $$ real code here $$; Bleah. It seems obscure to say the least. Why not have something along the lines of plperl's on_init

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-16 Thread Hannu Krosing
On 12/16/2012 08:44 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 12/16/2012 01:37 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: So in practice this might look like this: CREATE FUNCTION foo(...) ... LANGUAGE plpythonu AS $$ import x import y $$, $$ real code here $$; Bleah. It seems obscure to say the least. Why not

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-16 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On Sun, 2012-12-16 at 19:13 +0100, Hannu Krosing wrote: As an idea seems quite good, but maybe the run once part could use its own keyword in the future, something like PREPARE or REQUIRE? Well, either we do it in a language independent way, in which case this would be too prescriptive, or we

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-16 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On Sun, 2012-12-16 at 13:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Sure, but wouldn't it be cleaner to do that via some language-specific syntax inside the function string? I'm imagining some syntax like CREATE FUNCTION ... AS $$ global[ some definitions here ] function code here

Re: [HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-16 Thread Hannu Krosing
On 12/16/2012 10:23 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On Sun, 2012-12-16 at 19:13 +0100, Hannu Krosing wrote: As an idea seems quite good, but maybe the run once part could use its own keyword in the future, something like PREPARE or REQUIRE? Well, either we do it in a language independent way, in

[HACKERS] multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs

2012-12-15 Thread Peter Eisentraut
I'm going to use PL/Python as an example, but I would also like to know if this could be applicable to other languages. When you do CREATE FUNCTION foo(...) ... LANGUAGE plpythonu AS $$ source code here $$; it internally creates a source file that contains --- def