Re: UNION result
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: UNION result |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4545.1042642205@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: UNION result (Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: UNION result
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com> writes: > Hmm, I think (but am not sure) that the spec bit > in SQL92 that addresses this is 9.3 > Set operation result data types based on the > text in 7.10 query expression. It seems > to say to me that should always be an > approximate numeric (if 1.0 is an approximate > numeric). Am I reading that right? Yeah, the existing algorithm for determining CASE/UNION result datatype does not have any smarts about preferring numeric over integer, which is what's missing to handle this case per-spec. There has been some speculation about junking the existing code (which is mostly driven by a hardwired notion of "preferred types") in favor of something driven by the contents of pg_cast. (At least I recall a message or two about it, but I can't find it in the archives at the moment.) Nobody's made a specific proposal though --- and I'm more than a little bit worried about the possible speed penalty of turning what's presently a simple C switch-statement into a bunch of catalog lookups. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: