Tom Lane wrote:
>> Why can PLs not handle pseudo-types?
>
> No one's done the work to figure out which ones are sensible to support
> and then add the logic needed to support them.
>
PL/Java will handle the RECORD type correctly. I'm just finalizing a new, more flexible,
type mapping implementation for PL/Java and it would be easy to add support for more pseudo
types too. But what others would make sense?
Kind Regards,
Thomas Hallgren