Re: BUG #14853: Parameter type is required even when the query does not need to know the type

From: Eduardo Pérez Ureta <edpeur(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #14853: Parameter type is required even when the query does not need to know the type
Date: 2017-10-16 15:24:45
Message-ID: CAM7oS3HQwJoiT4Yza5kG-zcTU_grPA1RrtniuekvCuUR+C7hpg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

I have an application that I am trying to make it work in PostgreSQL and
PostgreSQL seems to be the only database that does not support queries like:
SELECT 1 WHERE ? IS NULL
with a Java setTimestamp parameter.

You say PostgreSQL is strongly typed, but an unknown type is accepted in
the cases I presented before. Do you mean that PostgreSQL is not following
the SQL standard?

On Oct 16, 2017 4:03 PM, "David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 10:40 PM, Eduardo Pérez Ureta <edpeur(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
>> My example is even better!
>> There is no need to infer the type as it is not needed!
>> PostgreSQL should be able to infer that no type is needed.
>>
>
> ​It could - but since SQL is a strongly typed language it doesn't have
> that luxury.
>
> The original thread you pointed to complained about the regression from
> protocol v2 to protocol v3. Is that your complaint too or do you have some
> other use case?
>
> David J.
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2017-10-16 15:39:33 Re: BUG #14853: Parameter type is required even when the query does not need to know the type
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-10-16 15:15:18 Re: Improper const-evaluation of HAVING with grouping sets and subquery pullup