On 03.06.21 23:29, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> writes:
On 02.06.21 02:04, Tom Lane wrote:
Hmm, actually we could make step 2 a shade tighter: if a candidate
routine is a function, match against proargtypes. If it's a procedure,
match against coalesce(proallargtypes, proargtypes). If we find
multiple matches, raise ambiguity error.
I'm ok with this proposal.
Cool. Do you want to try to implement it, or shall I?
A question that maybe we should refer to the RMT is whether it's
too late for this sort of redesign for v14. I dislike reverting
the OUT-procedure feature altogether in v14, but perhaps that's
the sanest way to proceed.
I'll take a look at this. I'm not clear on the beta schedule, but the
next beta is probably still a few weeks away.
