| From: | "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Thomas Lockhart" <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org> |
| Cc: | "Stephan Szabo" <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>, "Dave Blasby" <dblasby(at)refractions(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG: text(varchar) truncates at 31 bytes |
| Date: | 2001-10-04 10:49:03 |
| Message-ID: | 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA4212758@m0114.s-mxs.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org> writes:
> >> Perhaps it'd be a better idea for the option of a freebie
conversion
> >> to be checked earlier, say immediately after we discover there is
no
> >> exact match for the function name and input type. Thomas, what do
you
> >> think?
>
> > We *really* need that catalog lookup first. Otherwise, we will never
be
> > able to override the hardcoded compatibility assumptions in that
> > matching routine.
>
> Sure, I said *after* we fail to find an exact match. But the
"freebie"
> match is for a function name that matches a type name and is
> binary-compatible with the source type. That's not a weak constraint.
> ISTM that interpretation should take priority over interpretations
that
> involve more than one level of transformation.
That sounds very reasonable to me.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD | 2001-10-04 11:13:21 | Re: Problem on AIX with current |
| Previous Message | Lincoln Yeoh | 2001-10-04 09:47:57 | Re: Feature suggestion: Postgresql binding to one |