On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 24 September 2012 21:26, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>> Well, an obvious case is how record_to_json handles fields. If it knows
>> nothing about the type all it can do is output the string value. That
>> doesn't work well for types such as hstore. If it could reliably recognize a
>> field as an hstore it might well be able to do lots better.
>
> I think we're missing something in the discussion here.
>
> Why can't you find out the oid of the type by looking it up by name?
> That mechanism is used throughout postgres already and seems to work
> just fine.
>
Sure, but how do you know the type named "hstore" is what you know as
hstore? We don't have a global consensus a specific type name means
exactly what everyone thinks it is.
Thanks,
--
Hitoshi Harada