Re: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4320.910021838@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types (darcy@druid.net (D'Arcy J.M. Cain)) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types
RE: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
darcy@druid.net (D'Arcy J.M. Cain) writes: > OK, there are more problems. If you apply the following patch to the > regression tests you will crash the backend in a number of places. Yipes! I must withdraw my prior opinion that we should shoehorn in a repair to the INET datatypes for this case. It's clear that we have a wideranging problem that ought to be fixed more globally. But presumably it's been there for quite a while, and we didn't know it; therefore it's not critical enough to hold up the release. My guess is that maybe this should not be fixed in the individual datatypes at all; instead the generic function and operator code should be modified so that if any input value is NULL, then NULL is returned as the result without ever calling the datatype-specific code. There might be specific operators for which this is not the right behavior (although none spring to mind immediately). In that case, I think the best bet would be to have a per-operator flag, defaulting to OFF, which could be turned on for those specific operators that are prepared to cope with null inputs. Thoughts? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: