Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Type Categories for User-Defined Types

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Type Categories for User-Defined Types
Date: 2008-07-29 21:33:46
Message-ID: 16848.1217367226@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
> Well, there are already citext aliases for all of those operators, for  
> this very reason. There are citext aliases for a bunch of the  
> functions, too (ltrim(), substring(), etc.), so I wouldn't worry about  
> adding more. I've added more of them since I last sent a patch, mainly  
> for the regexp functions, replace(), strpos(), etc. I'd guess that I'm  
> about half-way there already, and there probably are a few I wouldn't  
> bother with (like timezone()).

That's exactly what I don't really want to do; if you are adding aliases
*only* to get rid of ambiguity-errors, and not to alter functionality,
then I think you're doing the wrong thing.  Adding more aliases can
easily make the situation worse.

> Anyway, would this issue then go away once the type stuff was added  
> and citext was specified as TYPE = 'S'?

Yeah, that's the point of the proposal.  I think the issue has come up
once or twice before, too, else I'd not be so interested in a general
solution.  (digs in archives ... there was some discussion of this
in connection with unsigned integer types, and I seem to recall older
threads but can't find any right now.)

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: David E. WheelerDate: 2008-07-29 22:06:08
Subject: Re: Type Categories for User-Defined Types
Previous:From: David E. WheelerDate: 2008-07-29 21:15:54
Subject: Re: Type Categories for User-Defined Types

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group