On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Florian Pflug <fgp.phlo....@gmail.com> wrote: > which returns the field named <field> from the record. The expected > field type is specified by providing a default value in <defval> of the > expected type. Since that argument's type is ANYELEMENT, just like the > return type, the type system copes perfectly with the varying return > type. You can choose whether to auto-coerce the field's value if it has > a type other than <defval>'s type or whether to raise an error. > > So in essence I'm using the ANYELEMENT trick to get a poor man's version > of your idea that doesn't require core changes. > > My post about this module got zero responses though...
Why should we use what you've already written when we can just write it ourselves? Next you are going to say you're already using it and it works really well :-). I think it's pretty cool. Is it safe to have the main functions immutable and not stable though? Is there any benefit missed by not going through pl/pgsql directly (I'm guessing maybe more elegant caching)? It's a little weird that you can return anyelement from your function in cases that don't guarantee a type from the query. Are there any downsides to doing that? merlin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
