Horton

Re: CALL versus procedures with output-only arguments

Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-06-01T01:28:06Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Mon, 2021-05-31 at 15:55 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > If I have two procedures
> > p1(IN int, IN int, OUT int, OUT int)
> > p1(OUT int, OUT int)
> > then a DROP, or ALTER, or GRANT, etc. on p1(int, int) should operate on 
> > the second one in a spec-compliant implementation, but you propose to 
> > have it operate on the first one.  That kind of discrepancy would be 
> > really bad to have.
> 
> We already have that situation for functions.  I think having procedures
> work differently from functions is much worse than your complaint here;
> and I do not see why being spec-compliant for one case when we are not
> for the other is a good situation to be in.

+1

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

Commits

  1. Reconsider the handling of procedure OUT parameters.