Tom Lane wrote:
> you are confusing an array over a domain type with a domain over
> an array type.
Yes I was. Sorry. Argument withdrawn.
-Kevin
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/
"Kevin Grittner" writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> So we will downcast myia to int[], or at least one might assume
>> that's what's happening. But actually it's worse than that: the
>> result of this operation is thought to be myia not int[], because
>> myia itself is taken as matching ANYARRAY, and
Tom Lane wrote:
> regression=# select array[1,2] || 3::myi;
> ERROR: operator does not exist: integer[] || myi
>
> In this case, one might expect myi to be automatically downcast to
< int so that it could be matched up with the int array, but that's
> not happening.
I guess it should allow t
Robert Haas writes:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:03 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> My point is that anyplace that is relying on the surface typelem,
>> without drilling down to see what the base type is, is wrong.
>> So yeah, those lookups are (will be) necessary.
> OK. In that case, +1 from me.
I've
On 20/10/10 01:47, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Comments?
It might be reasonable to back-patch whatever we decide on into 9.0,
because it is so new, but I would be reluctant to go back further
unless we have some evidence that it's bothering people. It
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:03 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> We've already accepted the cost of doing getBaseTypeAndTypmod() in a
>>> whole lot of performance-critical parsing paths, on the off chance that
>>> the target datatype
Robert Haas writes:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> We've already accepted the cost of doing getBaseTypeAndTypmod() in a
>> whole lot of performance-critical parsing paths, on the off chance that
>> the target datatype might be a domain. It's not apparent to me that
>> arra
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I think that what we ought to do about it is to stop exposing typelem
>>> in domains' pg_type rows. If you want to subscript a domain value, you
>>> should have to dril
Robert Haas writes:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think that what we ought to do about it is to stop exposing typelem
>> in domains' pg_type rows. If you want to subscript a domain value, you
>> should have to drill down to its base type with getBaseTypeAndTypmod,
>> wh
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> In bug #5717, Richard Huxton complains that a domain declared like
> CREATE DOMAIN mynums numeric(4,2)[1];
> doesn't work properly, ie, the typmod isn't enforced in places where
> it reasonably ought to be. I dug into this a bit, and found
10 matches
Mail list logo
