Re: BUG #15287: postgres_fdw: the "WHERE date_trunc('day', dt) = 'YYYY-MM-DD' does not push to remote.
От | Andrew Gierth |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #15287: postgres_fdw: the "WHERE date_trunc('day', dt) = 'YYYY-MM-DD' does not push to remote. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 87effxizux.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #15287: postgres_fdw: the "WHERE date_trunc('day', dt) = 'YYYY-MM-DD' does not push to remote. (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #15287: postgres_fdw: the "WHERE date_trunc('day', dt) ='YYYY-MM-DD' does not push to remote.
Re: BUG #15287: postgres_fdw: the "WHERE date_trunc('day', dt) = 'YYYY-MM-DD' does not push to remote. |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: Tom> Alternatively, if postgres_fdw could know which functions don't Tom> really pay attention to their input collation, it could skip this Tom> check for those functions. But that's not an easy thing to fix Tom> either. Wild idea: we have quite a few functions (e.g. date_trunc, date_part, timezone, encode, decode, make_timestamptz, plus various extension functions such as in pgcrypto) that take a "text" parameter which is nothing more than a poor-man's enum, or otherwise represents something which isn't actually free text. Perhaps these should use "name" instead, or in some cases an enum type? (or in the case of date_trunc and extract, maybe they need to be split up into separate functions so that we can properly distinguish the immutable from the mutable cases) -- Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: