| From: | Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Statistics Import and Export |
| Date: | 2024-04-01 18:46:15 |
| Message-ID: | CADkLM=dbta2JCE4Uab8K8g-GdpdJKOJ_YYnmMiiCFVksTFdHAA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> That's not what I suggested at all. The function parameters would
> be declared anyarray, but the values passed to them would be coerced
> to the correct concrete array types. So as far as the coercion rules
> are concerned this'd be equivalent to the variadic-any approach.
>
+1
>
> > That's pretty persuasive. It also means that we need to trap for error in
> > the array_in() calls, as that function does not yet have a _safe() mode.
>
> Well, the approach I'm advocating for would have the array input and
> coercion done by the calling query before control ever reaches
> pg_set_attribute_stats, so that any incorrect-for-the-data-type values
> would result in hard errors. I think that's okay for the same reason
> you probably figured you didn't have to trap array_in: it's the fault
> of the originating pg_dump if it offers a value that doesn't coerce to
> the datatype it claims the value is of.
+1
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Melanie Plageman | 2024-04-01 18:47:36 | Re: Combine Prune and Freeze records emitted by vacuum |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2024-04-01 18:39:05 | Re: [plpython] Add missing volatile qualifier. |