> I don't suppose
> there's a way to do this with functions that define multiple OUT
> parameters in lieu of a custom composite type?
Just had to dig a little further. Found my own answer in
INFORMATION_SCHEMA.PARAMETERS. Though I wish the specific_name column
didn't have that integer tagged at
>> But I still wonder it isn't a receiver/UI issue. Does your reader know
>> the meaning of "a_" vs "b_" in a non-trivial self join? Wouldn't you
>> rather have the output as a_col1, b_col1, a_col2, b_col2 ... for easy
>> comparison. And who can make sense of a 100 column results set anyway?:)
