Re: Define DatumGetInt8 function.

From: Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Define DatumGetInt8 function.
Date: 2025-12-29 16:01:10
Message-ID: CALdSSPg6UgK+6LJmFQ6G3av4J6dbngN7=QwQEuFZApnpmXgVWQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 29 Dec 2025 at 20:52, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> So from where I sit these look like an attractive nuisance that
> we should remove rather than encourage use of. If you have
> some extension data type for which these make sense, that's
> fine, but it doesn't mean they should be in core Postgres.
>
> regards, tom lane

Well, OK. Removal is also fine for me, because it is at least consistent.

--
Best regards,
Kirill Reshke

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2025-12-29 16:05:02 Re: lsyscache: free IndexAmRoutine objects returned by GetIndexAmRoutineByAmId()
Previous Message Kirill Reshke 2025-12-29 15:59:15 Re: [PATCH] Fix escaping for '\' and '"' in pageinspect for gist