Re: Dubious usage of TYPCATEGORY_STRING

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Dubious usage of TYPCATEGORY_STRING
Date: 2021-12-07 15:59:45
Message-ID: CA+TgmobEsWPvF4=yiL40cKySGDZ1bErHVei47PnpGuOTp86dww@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 4:22 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> An example of the reasons not to treat these types as being
> general-purpose strings can be seen at [1], where the "char"
> type has acquired some never-intended cast behaviors. Taking
> that to an extreme, we currently accept
>
> regression=# select '(1,2)'::point::"char";
> char
> ------
> (
> (1 row)

What's wrong with that?

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2021-12-07 16:18:17 Re: AW: Assorted improvements in pg_dump
Previous Message Robert Haas 2021-12-07 15:58:02 Re: Why doesn't pgstat_report_analyze() focus on not-all-visible-page dead tuple counts, specifically?