Dave Cramer
On Sat, 4 Mar 2023 at 11:35, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-03-02 at 09:13 -0500, Dave Cramer wrote:
> > I'd like to open up this discussion again so that we can
> > move forward. I prefer the GUC as it is relatively simple and as
> > Peter mentioned it works, but I'm not married to the idea.
>
> It's not very friendly to extensions, where the types are not
> guaranteed to have stable OIDs. Did you consider any proposals that
> work with type names?
>
I had not.
Most of the clients know how to decode the builtin types. I'm not sure
there is a use case for binary encode types that the clients don't have a
priori knowledge of.
Dave
>
> Regards,
> Jeff Davis
>
>