Re: Identifying no-op length coercions

Hi Alexey,

On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 05:08:51PM +0300, Alexey Klyukin wrote:
> Looks like this thread has silently died out. Is there an agreement on the
> syntax and implementation part? We (CMD) have a customer, who is interested in
> pushing this through, so, if we have a patch, I'd be happy to assist in
> reviewing it.

I think we have a consensus on the implementation. We didn't totally lock down
the syntax. Tom and I seem happy to have no SQL exposure at all, so that's what
I'm planning to submit. However, we were pretty close to a syntax consensus in
the event that it becomes desirable to do otherwise.

Is your interest in cheap varchar(N)->varchar(N+M) conversions specifically, or
in some broader application of this facility?

Thanks for volunteering to review; that will be a big help. Actually, I could
especially use some feedback now on a related design and implementation:
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20110524104029.GB18831@tornado.gateway.2wire.net
Note that the third and fifth sentences of that description are incorrect. The
rest stands without them. Even just some feedback on the mundane issue noted in
the last paragraph would help.

Thanks,
nm