On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 09:04:11PM +0400, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
> >Why do you want to?
>
> Just simplify.
>
> >For instance I can see reasons for wanting SETOF on a function's
> >input parameter (to pass it a whole table or select result in one
> >call).
>
> I see. But Typename is used for table'
Teodor Sigaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Why do you want to?
> Just simplify.
I think you'd just be moving the complexity somewhere else.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the plan
Why do you want to?
Just simplify.
For instance I can see reasons for wanting SETOF on a function's input
parameter (to pass it a whole table or select result in one call).
I see. But Typename is used for table's definition for example. I can't imagine
column "setof text".
--
Teodor Siga
Teodor Sigaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> May I eliminate SETOF from Typename and leave it
> only for RETURNS?
Why do you want to?
I think the reason it's in Typename is the assumption that in future
we would try to extend the applicability of SETOF, not restrict it.
For instance I can see rea
