Re: [HACKERS] CVS Branch Tagging...

> > Thomas, can you check the pg_proc table, and remove any of the
> > functions that are no longer needed. Seems we have a lot of them in
> > there that used to do conversions, that are no longer needed.
> > There are even functions to convert from int2 to int2. We are also
> > running low on systgem oids.
>
> Is this a problem for v6.4? Perhaps we can go with what we have for now,
> and do a cleanup early in v6.5 development?
>
> One thing: I've been thinking that, although we now do "automatic
> coersions" of types which will try to do the right thing by converting
> expression or function arguments to the appropriate type if there is not
> direct match in the catalog, a direct match is always/usually better to
> have. So, for example, there is an operator defined to multiply an int2
> by an int4. If one actually had an expression that was
>
> '2'::int2 * '4'::int4
>
> then this operator would be used. If one removed this operator, then the
> expression would still be evaluated, but done as
>
> int4('2'::int2) * '4'::int4
>
> which in this case will give the correct result, though be marginally
> slower because of the extra function call.
>
> But in principle there may be occasions when a "mixed type" operator
> will give a better/more accurate result than doing a type conversion and
> then a "uniform type" operation. So we should probably plan on leaving
> most of the mixed-type operators and functions in the system.

Yes. Leave it for 6.4. Just keep it mind next time you are looking in
there.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026