Re: [HACKERS] CVS Branch Tagging...

> > Thomas, can you check the pg_proc table, and remove any of the 
> > functions that are no longer needed.  Seems we have a lot of them in 
> > there that used to do conversions, that are no longer needed.
> > There are even functions to convert from int2 to int2.  We are also
> > running low on systgem oids.
> 
> Is this a problem for v6.4? Perhaps we can go with what we have for now,
> and do a cleanup early in v6.5 development?
> 
> One thing: I've been thinking that, although we now do "automatic
> coersions" of types which will try to do the right thing by converting
> expression or function arguments to the appropriate type if there is not
> direct match in the catalog, a direct match is always/usually better to
> have. So, for example, there is an operator defined to multiply an int2
> by an int4. If one actually had an expression that was
> 
>   '2'::int2 * '4'::int4
> 
> then this operator would be used. If one removed this operator, then the
> expression would still be evaluated, but done as
> 
>   int4('2'::int2) * '4'::int4
> 
> which in this case will give the correct result, though be marginally
> slower because of the extra function call.
> 
> But in principle there may be occasions when a "mixed type" operator
> will give a better/more accurate result than doing a type conversion and
> then a "uniform type" operation. So we should probably plan on leaving
> most of the mixed-type operators and functions in the system.

Yes.  Leave it for 6.4.  Just keep it mind next time you are looking in
there.


--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026