Can someone address the intagg issue here, or is the code OK?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Lane wrote:
> Joe Conway and I have just committed some changes in the internal
> representation of Postgres arrays: an element-type-OID field is added to
> the array header, and alignment calculations are now done the same way
> as in ordinary tuple storage, instead of taking shortcuts. I believe
> that these changes need to be reflected into the intarray, ltree, and
> intagg contrib modules.
>
> intarray and ltree both seem to be mapping their own declarations onto
> arrays using largely-similar code. But while intarray fails its
> regression test, I find ltree still passes. So I'm confused about what
> that code is really doing and don't want to touch it.
>
> I tried to fix intagg, but since there is no regression test for it
> I'm unsure whether it's okay.
>
> Could you folks take a look at CVS tip and see what changes are needed,
> if any?
>
> In the longer run, it might be possible to improve these routines to be
> array-type-polymorphic using the new features. But with the 7.3 beta
> date nearly upon us, I'd counsel first making the existing functionality
> work again...
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073