Re: Garbage pad bytes within datums are bad news
От | Teodor Sigaev |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Garbage pad bytes within datums are bad news |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 47F6A365.7050006@sigaev.ru обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Garbage pad bytes within datums are bad news (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Garbage pad bytes within datums are bad news
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> That still puts the responsibility on the individual datatype author to > get it right. The case I'm most worried about is user-written datatypes > that are never going to magically acquire such asserts. It seems to me that working with two assumption (binary equal and catalog-defined equal function) in the same time is a wrong way. If we decide to use binary equal criteria, then why we need catalog-defined equal at all? If we use catalog-defined one, why we should require binary equality? Using both way in the same time is an error prone. It's possible to say that two value is equal if they are binary the same, if not - weshould find catalog-defined equal operation and call it. Binary comparison is only an optimization. -- Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor@sigaev.ru WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: