Horton

Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-06-03T18:29:35Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
I wrote:
> Hmm, actually we could make step 2 a shade tighter: if a candidate
> routine is a function, match against proargtypes.  If it's a procedure,
> match against coalesce(proallargtypes, proargtypes).  If we find
> multiple matches, raise ambiguity error.

Where do we stand on this topic?

I'm willing to have a go at implementing things that way, but
time's a-wasting.

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Reconsider the handling of procedure OUT parameters.