Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I am not sure what to do about columns that
>> have datatypes without matching array types, though (that would include
>> array columns and domains, IIRC). Maybe use array of bytea to hold the
>> internal representation of the type?
> ISTM that the best (if not the only feasible) approach is using array of
> bytea to hold the internal representation of the type.
I'd like "select * from pg_statistic" to still produce readable output
whenever possible, though. The bytea approach falls down badly on that
score, so I don't want to resort to it except where I absolutely must.
I think that we can actually get away (from an implementation point of
view) with a column containing arrays of different base types; array_out
will still work AFAIR. It's an interesting question though how such a
column could reasonably be declared. This ties into your recent
investigations into polymorphic array functions, perhaps.
Maybe "anyarray" shouldn't be quite so pseudo a pseudotype?
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
