Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
>> I would love to say that this is related to change in casts, but that
>> isn't the case.
> Sure it is. The float=>int casts need to be made implicit, or we'll have
> tons of problems like this.
Well, yeah. That did not seem to bother anyone last spring, when we
were discussing tightening the implicit-casting rules. Shall we
abandon all that work and go back to "any available cast can be applied
implicitly"?
My vote is "tough, time to fix your SQL code".
regards, tom lane