*To summarise,* the options we have to solve the limitation of the
@>(anyarray , anyelement) where it produces the following error: operator
does not exist: integer[] @> smallint

*Option 1: *Multiple Operators
Have separate operators for every combination of datatypes instead of a
single polymorphic definition (i.e int4[] @>> int8, int4[] @>> int4, int4[]
@>> int2, int4[] @>> numeric.)

Drawback: High maintenance.

*Option 2: *Explicit casting
Where we compare the datatype of the 2 operands and cast with the
appropriate datatype

Drawback: figuring out the appropriate cast may require considerable

*Option 3:* Unsafe Polymorphic datatypes
This a little out there. But since @>(anyarray, anyelement) have to resolve
to the same datatype. How about defining new datatypes without this
constraint? Where we handle the datatypes ourselves? It would ve something
like @>(unsafeAnyarray, unsafeAnyelement).

Drawback: a lot of defensive programming has to be implemented to guard
against any exception.

*Another thing*
Until this is settled, another thing I have to go through is performance
testing. To provide evidence that all we did actually enhances the
performance of the RI checks. How can I go about this?

Best Regards,
Mark Rofail

Reply via email to