Re: regproc's lack of certainty is dangerous

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: regproc's lack of certainty is dangerous
Date: 2003-03-12 23:03:56
Message-ID: 236.1047510236@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I am not sure what to do about columns that
>> have datatypes without matching array types, though (that would include
>> array columns and domains, IIRC). Maybe use array of bytea to hold the
>> internal representation of the type?

> ISTM that the best (if not the only feasible) approach is using array of
> bytea to hold the internal representation of the type.

I'd like "select * from pg_statistic" to still produce readable output
whenever possible, though. The bytea approach falls down badly on that
score, so I don't want to resort to it except where I absolutely must.

I think that we can actually get away (from an implementation point of
view) with a column containing arrays of different base types; array_out
will still work AFAIR. It's an interesting question though how such a
column could reasonably be declared. This ties into your recent
investigations into polymorphic array functions, perhaps.

Maybe "anyarray" shouldn't be quite so pseudo a pseudotype?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2003-03-13 01:23:09 Re: SQL99 ARRAY support proposal
Previous Message Joe Conway 2003-03-12 22:04:07 Re: regproc's lack of certainty is dangerous