Re: Would you help to review our modifications
От | Merlin Moncure |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Would you help to review our modifications |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAHyXU0waEiiq=wSKVTs3zb3JuBtWsVg8z209__xty1vCW4hOyg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Would you help to review our modifications (David G Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:02 AM, David G Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote: > rohtodeveloper wrote >> So how to deal with this kind of situation if I want a implicit >> conversion? > > As of the out-of-support 8.3 release many of the implicit casts previously > defined have been changed to explicit casts. It is a catalog change - > obviously, since you can still define implicit casts - so if you absolutely > must have the pre-existing cast be implicit you can modify the catalog > directly. > > You may wish to describe why you think this is the solution you need - with > implicit casting there are generally more downsides that upsides. I feel your pain. My company just last year completed a nine month effort to validate a sprawling code base for post 8.3 casts. We were orphaned on 8.1 and were very nearly forced to switch to another database. merlin
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: