On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 12:41:25PM +1000, Ezequiel Tolnay wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> >Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> >>What happens if there is more than one existing function with that name
> >>already. Do all of the old functions get deleted?
> >
> >What happens if there are existing references to the function using the
> >old parameter list?
> >
> >The current approach is that if you want to change the parameter list or
> >result type, you have to issue DROP FUNCTION, with the resulting cascade
> >of any dependent objects. I think trying to change that would be a very
> >bad idea. It'd create a real mess in terms of consistency of views, and
> >what does it really buy you notationally over DROP/CREATE?
>
> What I see is that the overloading is a very cool feature, but is not
> necessary in most cases, and it introduces unnecessary administration
> hassles.
What are those unnecessary administration hassles? I'm not seeing what
could be so bad as to merit the added code complexity. Maybe the
problem is just that you are not using the appropiate administration
tool?
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]alvh.no-ip.org>)
Essentially, you're proposing Kevlar shoes as a solution for the problem
that you want to walk around carrying a loaded gun aimed at your foot.
(Tom Lane)
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
