Re: Polymorphic types vs. domains

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Polymorphic types vs. domains
Date: 2009-01-20 17:08:55
Message-ID: 200901201708.n0KH8uR03639@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Where are we on this? I tested CVS and the problem still seems to
exist.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Lane wrote:
> The proximate cause of this complaint:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2008-12/msg00283.php
> seems to be that the polymorphic-type code doesn't consider a domain
> over an enum type to match an ANYENUM function argument.
>
> ISTM this is probably wrong: we need such a domain to act like its base
> type for matching purposes. There is an analogous problem with a domain
> over an array type failing to match ANYARRAY; conversely, such a domain
> is considered to match ANYNONARRAY which it likely should not.
>
> Comments? If this is agreed to be a bug, should we consider
> back-patching it? (I'd vote not, I think, because the behavioral
> change could conceivably break some apps that work now.)
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2009-01-20 17:09:37 Re: visibility maps
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2009-01-20 17:04:31 Re: visibility maps and heap_prune