Re: Function with default value not replacing old definition of the function
От | Pavel Stehule |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Function with default value not replacing old definition of the function |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 162867790812102329s229725sb8a3e601b840f6b4@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Function with default value not replacing old definition of the function ("Rushabh Lathia" <rushabh.lathia@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Function with default value not replacing old definition of the function
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
2008/12/11 Rushabh Lathia <rushabh.lathia@gmail.com>: > > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Hello >> >> >> when you created function, we cannot check defaults, because we don't >> know if anybody use default or not. And when you call function, then >> postgres prefer function with most similar function. > > Ok, but what if I want to call a second function with the default values. > How can I call that function with default values? > it isn't possible yet (without DEFAULT keyword support). you have to drop myfunc(int) first. regards Pavel Stehule >> >> >> regards >> Pavel Stehule >> >> > >> > When create the same function again by added one default value, while >> > calling the function old function getting called. >> > >> > It seems that, function with defval not making any sense, if we want to >> > call >> > the new function then we need to pass defval as well. >> > >> > select myfunc(10,10); >> > >> > myfunc >> > ---------- >> > 200 >> > (1 row) >> > >> > I think second function should replace the old definition of the >> > function, >> > inputs ? >> > >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Rushabh Lathia >> > www.EnterpriseDB.com >> > > > > > -- > Rushabh Lathia > www.EnterpriseDB.com >
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: