Re: [HACKERS] DEFAULT fixed

> Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Does anyone have an opinion on this?  Why does only DEFAULT have this
> > problem?  Does anyone know how inserts of '' into char() fields get
> > padded with the proper atttypmod value?  Do I need to pass atttypmod to
> > all the functions that call parse_coerce, so I can pass a value for all
> > cases?
> 
> Possibly DEFAULT is the only case where the constant value created by
> the parser will get shoved directly into a tuple with no run-time
> coercion?  That's strictly a guess.  I agree this issue needs to be
> looked at more closely.
> 
> Now that we know the problem comes from missing atttypmod info, it
> seems likely that related failures can occur for NUMERIC and other
> types that depend on atttypmod.  (Are there any such types?  Even
> if there aren't now, there will probably be more and more in future.)
> It might be best to just bite the bullet and make the parser carry
> around both the type's OID and typmod at all times.

That was my guess too, that atttypmod would become more important.

--  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