From: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Mike Toews <mwtoews(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Show type in psql SELECT |
Date: | 2013-02-25 01:13:13 |
Message-ID: | 512ABAA9.4020705@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 02/25/2013 08:54 AM, Mike Toews wrote:
> On 25 February 2013 12:48, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com
> <mailto:craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>> wrote:
> > However, the thing I want most couldn't be provided by this patch
> > because it seems to be a deeper server limitation: the ability to get
> > typmod data from calculation results like
> >
> > NUMERIC(8,3) '11.131' + NUMERIC(8,3) '12.123'
>
> But is the derived typmod always available?
No, it usually isn't. I doubt this patch can provide that information
because the server doesn't keep track of derived typmods through a lot
of internal operations. If it can I'll jump for joy.
I was just pointing out that you can already get something similar to
this patch's effects with pg_typeof . It's a nice convenience not to
have to wrap everything in pg_typeof, though, and this patch seems useful.
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Duffey | 2013-02-25 02:13:20 | Floating point error |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2013-02-25 01:01:52 | Why do we still perform a check for pre-sorted input within qsort variants? |