Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>> If we go down that path, how far do we go? We also know that two enums
>> are never binary-compatible, right? Composite type and a user-defined
>> base type? Hardly, unless you're doing something very hacky...
>> Disallowing binary casts when any composite types or enums are involved
>> seems sane, but that's as far as we can go with a few lines of code.
> Arrays have embedded type OIDs too ...
I've committed a simple check, disallowing composite types, enums and
arrays in binary casts.
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Gregory Clark||Date: 2009-03-04 15:42:50|
|Subject: BUG #4691: Installation error|
|Previous:||From: Guillaume Smet||Date: 2009-03-04 10:57:17|
|Subject: Re: BUG #4689: Expanding the length of a VARCHAR column should not induce a table rewrite|