Hi all,
I needed introspection capabilities for record types to write more generic
trigger procedures in PL/PGSQL.
With the following patch it's possible to
- extract all field names of a record into an array
- extract field count of a record
- address a single field of a record with a variable
Neil Conway schrieb:
> Titus von Boxberg wrote:
>
> Can you supply some proper regression tests, please? i.e. patch sql/plpgsql.sql and
expected/plpgsql.out in src/test/regress
In sql/plpgsql.sql I have added a function testing the new features
and altered expected/plpgsql.out
Neil Conway schrieb:
Titus von Boxberg wrote:
Can you supply some proper regression tests, please? i.e. patch
sql/plpgsql.sql and expected/plpgsql.out in src/test/regress
In sql/plpgsql.sql I have added a function testing the new features
and altered expected/plpgsql.out
A few minor
Neil Conway schrieb:
I wonder if this is the right syntax. record%identifier is doing
something fundamentally different from record.identifier, but the syntax
doesn't make that clear. I don't have any concrete suggestions for
improvement, mind you... :)
What do you mean by "right syntax". Ther
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Not from me. You missed the 8.1 freeze by about two weeks, so I'm not
> > sure if this is a candidate for 8.1 though.
>
> Not a chance.
>
> regards, tom
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Tom Lane
> An: Neil Conway
> Cc: Titus von Boxberg
> Betreff: Re: [PATCHES] PL/PGSQL: Dynamic Record Introspection
>
---
> There's a worse objection, which is that % is a perfectly valid operator
OK. I did not
Tom Lane schrieb:
"Titus von Boxberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
It works for me if we want to have an "NFIELDS" construct. Personally
I'm still not convinced that we need one --- what's the use-case?
I have removed the NFIELDS construct
I'd p
