"Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This patch contains SQL/XML public function XMLFOREST, XMLELEMENT, ... based 
> on CString type. This patch hasn't high quality, but can be usefull for 
> testing funcionality, and maybe for some people.

1. Why did you base the datatype on cstring?  That's inappropriate for
anything except guaranteed-short strings, because it's not toastable.

2. Is it really necessary to hack up the grammar for this?  Seems like
you should create ordinary functions to manipulate the datatype(s).
If every datatype thought it could do this sort of thing, we'd have
a completely unmanageable grammar.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?


Reply via email to