> OK, I can change it, but it is not easy. Will take time.
> > Can we go to int32 on atttypmod? I'll try to break it up into two
> > sub-fields to implement numeric().
I am planning on stripping out the atttypmod usage for string type input
functions (that third parameter).
That was the wrong end to check, since it is the point at which storage
happens that things really need to be checked. Otherwise, no
validation/verification can happen on expression results, only on
constant input values.
Don't know if ignoring that area makes things any easier for you...
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Thomas G. Lockhart||Date: 1998-06-01 06:29:55|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Current sources?|
|Previous:||From: Thomas G. Lockhart||Date: 1998-06-01 06:15:33|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] duplicate oids in pg_proc|