On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 12:20:30PM +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote: > Here is the corrected patch.
313f87a17155 is one example of a similar change with pg_lsn, with four entries added to pg_proc and two to pg_aggregate. That's what this patch is doing from what I can see. - and arrays of any of these types. + and also arrays and records of any of these types. This update of the docs is incorrect, no? Records could include much more types than the ones currently supported for min()/max(). I am not sure to get the concerns of upthread regarding the type caching in the context of an aggregate, which is the business with lookup_type_cache(), especially since there is a btree operator relying on record_cmp(). Tom, what were your concerns here? -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
