| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, premanand <kottiprem(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: MySQL search query is not executing in Postgres DB |
| Date: | 2012-08-28 17:39:42 |
| Message-ID: | 4279.1346175582@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Also, right at the moment it's not clear to me whether there are any
>> other cases besides integer literal vs smallint argument. I think
>> that's the only particularly surprising case within the numeric
>> hierarchy --- and for non-numeric types, the literal is generally going
>> to start out "unknown" so the whole problem doesn't arise. I feel
>> uncomfortable trying to invent general-purpose solutions to problems
>> we have only one instance of ...
> The other case that comes up regularly is someone trying to pass some
> kind of number to a function such as LPAD(). There is only one LPAD()
> so no ambiguity exists, but PostgreSQL doesn't even see that there's a
> candidate.
There still won't be a candidate for that one, unless you're proposing
to allow explicit-only coercions to be applied implicitly.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2012-08-28 17:40:28 | Re: MySQL search query is not executing in Postgres DB |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-08-28 17:37:50 | Re: Use of systable_beginscan_ordered in event trigger patch |