"David G. Johnston" writes:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 8:51 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> The PG wire protocol specification [1] defines these fields thus:
>> If the field can be identified as a column of a specific
>> table, the object ID of the table; otherwise zero.
> s/can be identified as/
"David G. Johnston" writes:
> Based upon that unargued point the only bug here is in the documentation,
> leaving the reader to assume that some effort will be made to chain
> together a function returns clause to a physical table through that table's
> automatically-generated composite type.
Hmm
On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 8:51 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> The PG wire protocol specification [1] defines these fields thus:
>
> If the field can be identified as a column of a specific
> table, the object ID of the table; otherwise zero.
>
> If the field can be identified as a c
On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 8:41 AM Maxwell Dreytser <
maxwell.dreyt...@assistek.com> wrote:
> On Friday, June 21, 2024 11:28 AM David G. Johnston <
> david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In short, the system doesn't generate the information you need, where
> you need it, to tie these pieces toget
Maxwell Dreytser writes:
> I am working on a meta-programming use-case where I need to scrape some
> detailed information about the results of a function that "RETURNS TABLE
> (LIKE physical_table)", which ends up with prorettype =
> 'physical_table'::regtype.
> The problem is that for the quer
On Friday, June 21, 2024 11:28 AM David G. Johnston
wrote:
> Interesting, then I suppose it is semantics. There is no table involved -
> you are referencing the type of that name, not the table - so no TableOID.
> There is no guarantee the row you are holding came from a table - and I'd
> i
On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 8:04 AM Maxwell Dreytser <
maxwell.dreyt...@assistek.com> wrote:
> On Friday, June 21, 2024 10:48 AM David G. Johnston <
> david.g.johns...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >Yes, but the bug is yours. The definition you want is: RETURNS SETOF
> physical_table (not tested though)
> >W
On Friday, June 21, 2024 10:48 AM David G. Johnston
wrote:
>Yes, but the bug is yours. The definition you want is: RETURNS SETOF
>physical_table (not tested though)
>What you did was produce a one-column table whose column type is a composite
>(and whose name is like - what with case-folding
On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 7:42 AM Maxwell Dreytser <
maxwell.dreyt...@assistek.com> wrote:
> I am working on a meta-programming use-case where I need to scrape some
> detailed information about the results of a function that "RETURNS TABLE
> (LIKE physical_table)"
>
Yes, but the bug is yours. The
