AW: AW: Cast INTEGER to BIT confusion

I am giving up. While even `SELECT current_schemas(true)` correctly prints `xxx, pg_catalog` it still uses the original bit type. This is completely NOT as described in the documentation, where it is clearly told that pg_catalog only is searched immediately if NOT found in the search path. It seems it is simply impossible to run this application on PostgreSQL, and we have to stick with a different RDBMS. Very sad.
-Markus

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Erik Wienhold <ewie(at)ewie(dot)name>
Gesendet: Dienstag, 15. August 2023 16:28
An: [Quipsy] Markus Karg <karg(at)quipsy(dot)de>; pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Betreff: Re: AW: Cast INTEGER to BIT confusion

> On 15/08/2023 14:02 CEST [Quipsy] Markus Karg <karg(at)quipsy(dot)de> wrote:
>
> I just tried out your proposal on PostgreSQL 15.3 and this is the result:
>
> ERROR: column "c" is of type bit but expression is of type integer
> LINE 5: INSERT INTO t VALUES (1);
> ^
> HINT: You will need to rewrite or cast the expression.
>
> Apparently the search path is ignored?!
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Erik Wienhold <ewie(at)ewie(dot)name>
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 15. August 2023 13:48
> An: [Quipsy] Markus Karg <karg(at)quipsy(dot)de>;
> pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
> Betreff: Re: Cast INTEGER to BIT confusion
>
> You could create a custom domain if you're only interested in values 0
> and 1 and don't use bit string functions. The search path must be
> changed so that domain bit overrides pg_catalog.bit:
>
> =# CREATE SCHEMA xxx;
> =# CREATE DOMAIN xxx.bit AS int;
> =# SET search_path = xxx, pg_catalog;
> =# CREATE TABLE t (c bit);
> =# INSERT INTO t VALUES (1);
> INSERT 0 1
>
> But I would do that only if the third-party code cannot be tweaked
> because the custom domain could be confusing. It's also prone to
> errors as it relies on a specific search path order. Also make sure
> that regular users cannot create objects in schema xxx that would override objects in pg_catalog.

Hmm, I thought that Postgres resolves all types through the search path, but apparently that is not the case for built-in types. I never used this to override built-in types so this is a surprise to me. (And obviously I haven't tested the search path feature before posting.)

Neither [1] or [2] mention that special (?) case or if there's a distinction between built-in types and user-defined types. The USAGE privilege is required according to [2] but I was testing as superuser anyway.

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/ddl-schemas.html
[2] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/runtime-config-client.html#GUC-SEARCH-PATH

--
Erik