On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Alex Hunsaker <bada...@gmail.com> writes: >> That being said it seems we failed to take any magic (aka string >> overloads) that a blessed reference might have. Ill see about >> submitting a patch for 9.3 (9.2 just entered beta). Anyone have any >> thoughts on if we should backpatch a fix? > > Right offhand I'd be +1 for making that change, but not for backpatching > it; but I'm not a big plperl user. Would such a case have worked before > 9.1? If it did and we broke it in 9.1, that would be a good reason to > back-patch into 9.1. If it never worked, then it sounds like a new > feature.
Yeah, it worked pre 9.1. -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
