2010/4/14 Kevin J Bluck <kevin.bl...@netce.com>: >> I'd certainly call this a bug, if not a couple of different bugs. > > There seems to be more. I see a problem not just with unqualified char not > being treated equivalent to char(1). I also see a general problem with > RETURNS TABLE disregarding any explicit lengths declared for any character > type. For example, if you declare a RETURNS TABLE column as VARCHAR(15), it > seems to actually consider it as if you had declared it unqualified VARCHAR, > equivalent to TEXT. Similarly, a column defined as CHAR(2) will also be > treated as unqualified CHAR without an explicit length, with the further > problem reported by Pavel of being treated as unlimited length instead of > equivalent to CHAR(1) as expected. In other words, it seems to be effectively > impossible to declare explicit lengths for RETURNS TABLE character type > columns. > > This doesn't happen with the RETURNS SETOF variation, only RETURNS TABLE. > > Regards,
RETURNS TABLE (x int, y int) is equal to CREATE FUNCTION foo(.. OUT x int, OUT y int) RETURNS SETOF RECORD. But PostgreSQL functions ignore typmod for parameters - so it is not bug, it is feature :( Pavel Stehule > > --- Kevin > > > > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs > -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
