Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What I don't understand is this. The cast from varchar to text is a
> no-function one. I.e. - they are defined to be memory-represented the
> same. If that is the case, one would expect them to also share the input
> and ouput functions. When looking at the catalog, however, it appears
> that textin is used to input text, while varcharin is used for varchars.
Sure. Identical internal representation does not necessarily imply
identical functionality. varcharin needs to enforce a maximum length
(and now that I think of it, varcharrecv does too; that's an oversight).
Another example is that abstime is binary-compatible to integer. Should
they have the same input function?
> It gets wierder. The binary receive function for varchar (varcharrecv)
> is different than the one for text (textrecv), but the C implementation
> of the former simply calls the C implementation of the later. Why not
> define them to be the same at the SQL level?
So we can fix bugs like the one above without forcing initdb.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
