| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: types reliant on encodings [was Re: Dubious usage of TYPCATEGORY_STRING] |
| Date: | 2021-12-07 15:52:42 |
| Message-ID: | e0632341-8e71-b4ca-330c-955f3bf66b26@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 03.12.21 19:42, Chapman Flack wrote:
> Is there any way to find out, from the catalogs or in any automatable way,
> which types are implemented with a dependence on the database encoding
> (or on some encoding)?
What is this needed for? C code can internally do whatever it wants,
and the database encoding is effectively a constant, so there is no need
for server-side code to be very much concerned about whether types do this.
Also, "types" is perhaps the wrong subject here. Types only contain
input and output functions and a few more bits. Additional functions
operating on the type could look at the server encoding without the type
and its core functions knowing about it.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Anton Voloshin | 2021-12-07 15:54:57 | Re: Triage for unimplemented geometric operators |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-12-07 15:51:46 | Re: Dubious usage of TYPCATEGORY_STRING |