Sergey Konoplev escribió:
> >> I understand the POV of both Evan and you here. However, I think that
> >> there might be a good solution for this particular case - to allow
> >> dropping functions by name only if it has the only signature, but if
> >> there are 2 or more signatures then print an e
In a nutshell: I think the difficulty of dropping functions is
inconsistent with the difficulty of dropping other objects and I'd like
to see this inconsistency fixed.
So I don't agree with the suggestion of matching function names using a
regex, since that's not supported for other types of o
Sergey Konoplev writes:
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>> Sergey Konoplev escribió:
>>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 10:09 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
People periodically ask for extensions flavored more or less like this,
but I'm suspicious of building any such thing int
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Sergey Konoplev escribió:
>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 10:09 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> > People periodically ask for extensions flavored more or less like this,
>> > but I'm suspicious of building any such thing into the core. There's too
>> > li
Sergey Konoplev escribió:
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 10:09 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > People periodically ask for extensions flavored more or less like this,
> > but I'm suspicious of building any such thing into the core. There's too
> > little commonality in the exact conditions they want to search
2014-02-03 Evan Martin :
> Thanks for that "oid::regprocedure" trick! A query like this is fairly
> simple once you know it, but completely non-obvious when you don't.
>
> I'm not sure what conditions others want to search on (couldn't find it in
> the list archives), but "by qualified function na
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Sergey Konoplev escribió:
>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 10:09 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> > People periodically ask for extensions flavored more or less like this,
>> > but I'm suspicious of building any such thing into the core. There's too
>> > li
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 10:09 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> People periodically ask for extensions flavored more or less like this,
> but I'm suspicious of building any such thing into the core. There's too
> little commonality in the exact conditions they want to search on.
> Leaving it at the level of a
Thanks for that "oid::regprocedure" trick! A query like this is fairly
simple once you know it, but completely non-obvious when you don't.
I'm not sure what conditions others want to search on (couldn't find it
in the list archives), but "by qualified function name" seems like the
obvious one.
Evan Martin writes:
> Is there any easy way to drop a function (all overloads of it) without
> knowing the parameter types?
Something along the lines of
do $$
declare fname text;
begin
for fname in select oid::regprocedure from pg_proc where proname = 'foo' loop
execute 'drop function ' || fn
Hi All,
Is there any easy way to drop a function (all overloads of it) without
knowing the parameter types? If not, it would be good to see it added.
When I change a function definition I just want to run the SQL script
that defines it and have any existing function replaced. CREATE OR
REPLA
11 matches
Mail list logo
