Re: Timestamp conversion can't use index

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: thomas(at)pgsql(dot)com, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Timestamp conversion can't use index
Date: 2001-12-27 04:39:15
Message-ID: 22761.1009427955@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Added to same files:
> datatype(const,...) function calls now evaluated earlier

This is quite wrong, since (a) the change only applies to single-
argument function calls (so, no "..."), (b) the call is not
evaluated "earlier", but "differently", and (c) it doesn't only
apply to constant arguments.

Not sure that I can come up with a one-liner definition of this change,
but the above definitely doesn't do the job.

We already have

Modify type coersion logic to attempt binary-compatible functions first (Tom)

and I'm not sure there is a better one-liner for it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-12-27 04:45:45 Re: Timestamp conversion can't use index
Previous Message Barry Lind 2001-12-27 02:44:35 Re: [HACKERS] Failure in timestamptz of JDBC of 7.2b4