Re: [HACKERS] I think we need an explicit parsetree node for CAST

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [HACKERS] I think we need an explicit parsetree node for CAST
Дата
Msg-id 17946.947996562@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] I think we need an explicit parsetree node for CAST  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] I think we need an explicit parsetree node for CAST  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Actually, I think I never made the additional atttypmod changes because
> no one had ever reported a problem, and I was confused by that.

I think that after further discussion, we concluded that it wasn't
really possible to determine an atttypmod value to attach to the
result of most expressions.  However, CAST is a special case because
there *is* a typmod value associated with the Typename node.  The
thing I want to do is make sure we hold onto that value long enough
to use it...
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: pg_dump not in very good shape
Следующее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] INDEX_MAX_KEYS and pg_dump