Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Interesting -- I missed that patch, but it seems like a better approach.
> Are you already reviewing Pavel's patch, or is it something I could take
> a look at?

The main objection I have is that I don't think changing the definition
of pg_proc.proargmodes is a good idea --- that will break some
nontrivial amount of client-side code in order to support a distinction
that seems unimportant.  IMHO anyway.  Feel free to take a whack at it.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
       choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not

Reply via email to