On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > * Pavel Stehule (pavel.steh...@gmail.com) wrote: >> I don't agree so it works well - you cannot use short type names is >> significant issue > > This is for psql. In what use-case do you see that being a serious > limitation? > > I might support having psql be able to fall-back to checking if the > function name is unique (or perhaps doing that first before going on to > look at the function arguments) but I don't think this should all be > punted to the backend where only 9.3+ would have any real support for a > capability which already exists in other places and should be trivially > added to these.
Since time is running short for discussion of 9.3: I still think this patch is an improvement over the status quo, and is committable as-is. Yes, the patch doesn't address the existing ugliness with minimal_error_message() and sidestepping PSQLexec(), but at least it fixes the --echo-hidden behavior, and the various other issues may be handled separately. Josh -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
