Re: TODO item - tid <> operator

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: TODO item - tid <> operator
Date: 2005-10-25 14:49:59
Message-ID: 200510251449.j9PEnxk24452@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > This has been saved for the 8.2 release:
> > http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold
>
> Uh, why do we need this at all? "NOT (tid = tid)" covers the
> functionality already.

tid should be a fully functional type, at least for = and !=.

> I disagree strongly with renumbering existing hand-assigned OIDs for
> this. There's too much risk of breakage and no benefit.

Agreed.

> Also, you forgot to add the negator cross-links between the operators.

OK.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2005-10-25 15:12:48 Re: Release notes typo
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-10-25 14:21:53 Re: TODO item - tid <> operator