From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Ryan Bradetich <rbradetich(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [RFC] Unsigned integer support. |
Date: | 2008-07-25 15:42:53 |
Message-ID: | 20080725154253.GM9891@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Gregory Stark escribió:
> One other idea that's been mentioned before is treating integral constants
> like 150000 as type "unknown" like the quoted '150000' constant is. That way
> the parser would see uint4+unknown and could pick the uint4 operator. But that
> would be a pretty massive semantics change.
Hmm, if we do that, how would the system resolve something like this?
select 1000 + 1000
There would be no clue as to what + operator to pick, since both
operands are unknown. This is in fact what happens today with
alvherre=# select '100' + '100';
ERROR: operator is not unique: unknown + unknown at character 14
HINT: Could not choose a best candidate operator. You might need to add explicit type casts.
STATEMENT: select '100' + '100';
I think this is a nonstarter.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hiroshi Saito | 2008-07-25 16:25:55 | Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext intoPG core distribution? |
Previous Message | Ryan Bradetich | 2008-07-25 15:25:48 | Re: [RFC] Unsigned integer support. |