From: | jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com>, Steve Chavez <steve(at)supabase(dot)io>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Add pg_basetype() function to obtain a DOMAIN base type |
Date: | 2024-03-21 02:34:36 |
Message-ID: | CACJufxFX1by6p23QTSF6JDdOLVbNSdGwGPKvxvnKDhs2pyhmYw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 11:43 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 2:01 AM jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> `
> >> Datum
> >> pg_basetype(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
> >> {
> >> Oid oid;
> >>
> >> oid = get_fn_expr_argtype(fcinfo->flinfo, 0);
> >> PG_RETURN_OID(getBaseType(oid));
> >> }
> >> `
>
> > Looks good to me. But should it be named pg_basetypeof()?
>
> I still don't like this approach. It forces the function to be
> used in a particular way that's highly redundant with pg_typeof.
> I think we'd be better off with
>
> pg_basetype(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
> {
> Oid typid = PG_GETARG_OID(0);
>
> PG_RETURN_OID(getBaseType(typid));
> }
>
> The use-case that the other definition handles would be implemented
> like
>
> pg_basetype(pg_typeof(expression))
>
trying to do it this way.
not sure the following error message is expected.
SELECT pg_basetype(-1);
ERROR: cache lookup failed for type 4294967295
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v5-0001-Add-pg_basetype-regtype-function-to-return-the-ba.patch | application/x-patch | 5.6 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2024-03-21 02:37:16 | Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2024-03-21 02:30:43 | Re: Possibility to disable `ALTER SYSTEM` |