Re: Function proposal to find the type of a datum

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kate F <kate(at)cats(dot)meow(dot)at>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pavel(dot)stehule(at)hotmail(dot)com
Subject: Re: Function proposal to find the type of a datum
Date: 2007-02-02 07:41:15
Message-ID: 26410.1170402075@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Kate F <kate(at)cats(dot)meow(dot)at> writes:
> ... OF takes a list of types; it needs parentheses:
> IF a IS OF (INTEGER) THEN

Oh, right, minor detail.

> Meanwhile, I still think the function David proposed is a worthy
> addition (and I still have a user-case for it!), as using just the OF
> operator for something similar, one would have to explictly test
> against every type required.

Um, but what would you do differently with an OID result? The nice
thing about the SQL-spec syntax is that it avoids depending on anything
so implementation-specific as a pg_type OID. So if it covers the
territory then I'd be inclined to go that way. What useful
functionality does it lack?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2007-02-02 07:47:22 ToDo: add documentation for operator IS OF
Previous Message Kate F 2007-02-02 07:31:13 Re: Function proposal to find the type of a datum