Re: inet/cidr type comparisons

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: inet/cidr type comparisons
Дата
Msg-id 5651.992283225@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: inet/cidr type comparisons  (Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com>)
Ответы Re: inet/cidr type comparisons  (Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com> writes:
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
>> While there may not be a user-visible function for next-network-part,
>> that hardly matters since the special-indexqual stuff isn't user-visible
>> either.

> Well, since I'm making an indexqual clause, I do need a valid pg_proc id
> there. 

No, you need a constant there.

> It can't be resolved during the planning (directfunctioncall) because I do
> want queries of a << b (b isn't a constant) to be also using the same
> mechanism. (so far it looks like special_index_* can cope with that OK)

You're mistaken ... that's not supported currently.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: mlw
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: OID Wrap
Следующее
От: Mike Cianflone
Дата:
Сообщение: RE: Strange behavior on multiple primary key behavior d eleting childr en