From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bear Giles <bgiles(at)coyotesong(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: inserting user defined types through a rule? |
Date: | 2002-04-02 02:58:37 |
Message-ID: | 20105.1017716317@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bear Giles <bgiles(at)coyotesong(dot)com> writes:
> I recently discovered a problem inserting a user-defined type when
> going through a rule. ...
> The problem is that I can insert literal text:
> create table t ( cert x509 );
> insert into t values ('---- BEGIN CERTIFICATE ---- ....');
> but when I try the same with cert_insert it's clear that "new.cert"
> isn't getting initialized properly. (It works fine when the cert is
> already in the database.) Trying to explicitly cast the literal to
> as part of the query doesn't help - it seems that the rule just rewrites
> the query and the cast is getting lost.
This seems like a bug, but I don't have much hope of being able to find
it without a test case to step through. Could you boil things down to a
reproducible test case?
FWIW, it seems unlikely that the issue is your user-defined type per se;
the rule rewriter mechanisms are quite type-ignorant. You may be able
to develop a test case that doesn't use your own type at all.
> Any ideas? Is this something addressed in 7.2?
Can't tell at this point. What version are you using, anyway?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bear Giles | 2002-04-02 03:37:34 | Re: inserting user defined types through a rule? |
Previous Message | Nicolas Bazin | 2002-04-02 00:41:51 | please apply patch |