Re: BUG #5748: Invalid oidvector data during binary recv
От | Greg Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #5748: Invalid oidvector data during binary recv |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTi=jxa5AtYMw+=fsXFudK0VbkiD0=oFHdfLF_rKg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #5748: Invalid oidvector data during binary recv (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #5748: Invalid oidvector data during binary recv
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Actually, after consuming a bit more caffeine, I see what Yeb is on about. > Even though the system in general doesn't make much of a distinction > between zero-element arrays of different dimensionalities, there *are* > functions that can distinguish --- array_ndims() being the most obvious > one. =A0Shouldn't we ensure that binary dump and reload of an array value > doesn't change the value in any SQL-observable way? =A0If so, I think his > patch is correct, even though it's changing more than just the > originally-complained-of behavior. We went to a lot of effort to preserve lower bounds for dumped arrays so I would agree. I was actually one of the few people that actually ran into this prior to the fix. We had arrays generated by the intagg functions which were 0-based and after dumping and reloading were 1-based causing our functions which calculated the array sizes to misbehave. > > While I'm looking at this ... why is it that array_ndims returns NULL > and not 0 for a zero-dimensional array? =A00-D arrays might have been > unsupported at one time, but they're certainly considered valid now. Is this the same question as split() on enmpty strings? Do we have a problem distinguishing between a 0-dimensional array and a 1-dimensional empty array? --=20 greg
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: