On Wed, 2006-10-11 at 11:05 -0700, Uwe C. Schroeder wrote: > On Wednesday 11 October 2006 10:42, A. Kretschmer wrote: > > am Wed, dem 11.10.2006, um 12:56:51 -0400 mailte Tom Lane folgendes: > > > Andreas Kretschmer <akretschmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > Joe Kramer <cckramer@xxxxxxxxx> schrieb: > > > >> I want to get: > > > >> item_id | last_update > > > >> ------------------------------------- > > > >> 32 | 1234-12-12 12:12:12 > > > > > > > > Untested: > > > > SELECT item_id, last_update from public.new_item(3,2); > > > > > > Or just > > > SELECT * FROM public.new_item(3,2); > > > > Yes, but i have learned, that 'SELECT * ...' is evil... > > Well, "SELECT *" is only evil if your application relies on a specific column > order to function. The moment you change the table layout and you're using > "select *" your application will cease functioning. > My app uses tons of select *, but then I wrote an object mapper that queries > the information schema at startup - so it's aware of table changes and > adjusts accordingly. > It's aware of the tables as they exist at startup. That may change between when the mapper looks at the information schema and when it gets the results of a query. If you know what it's doing it's probably fine, but that doesn't seem like a general solution. Regards, Jeff Davis
