Re: Type Categories for User-Defined Types
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Type Categories for User-Defined Types |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 16848.1217367226@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Type Categories for User-Defined Types ("David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Type Categories for User-Defined Types
Re: Type Categories for User-Defined Types Re: Type Categories for User-Defined Types |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com> writes: > Well, there are already citext aliases for all of those operators, for > this very reason. There are citext aliases for a bunch of the > functions, too (ltrim(), substring(), etc.), so I wouldn't worry about > adding more. I've added more of them since I last sent a patch, mainly > for the regexp functions, replace(), strpos(), etc. I'd guess that I'm > about half-way there already, and there probably are a few I wouldn't > bother with (like timezone()). That's exactly what I don't really want to do; if you are adding aliases *only* to get rid of ambiguity-errors, and not to alter functionality, then I think you're doing the wrong thing. Adding more aliases can easily make the situation worse. > Anyway, would this issue then go away once the type stuff was added > and citext was specified as TYPE = 'S'? Yeah, that's the point of the proposal. I think the issue has come up once or twice before, too, else I'd not be so interested in a general solution. (digs in archives ... there was some discussion of this in connection with unsigned integer types, and I seem to recall older threads but can't find any right now.) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: