| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: proposal: new polymorphic types - commontype and commontypearray |
| Date: | 2020-03-16 00:20:49 |
| Message-ID: | 23545.1584318049@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> ne 15. 3. 2020 v 17:48 odesílatel Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> napsal:
>> Well, here's a version that does it like that, but personally I find these
>> messages too verbose and not an improvement on what I had before.
> There was a problem just with anyrange type. This last version looks
> perfect.
If you think that "matching polymorphic types" is too vague, I'm
not sure there's much daylight between there and spelling it out
in full as this latest patch does. "anyrange is the only problem"
might be a tenable viewpoint today, but once this patchset goes
in there's going to be much more scope for confusion about which
arguments potentially match a polymorphic result.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | imai.yoshikazu@fujitsu.com | 2020-03-16 01:34:11 | RE: Planning counters in pg_stat_statements (using pgss_store) |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2020-03-15 23:48:33 | Re: control max length of parameter values logged |