On 2008-02-15 14:32, Tom Lane wrote:
"Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Again, you are not understanding my point. My point was that specifying
tablename.columnname%TYPE notation doesn't help with the performance
problem; I have to explicitly cast the parameter in the body of the
function.
The reason for the lack of communication is that no one else believes
that premise. Casting a value to the same type it already has is
demonstrably a no-op.
Casing a TEXT item to a CHAR( 9 ) item isn't a no-op. I've seen this
before in "EXPLAIN ..." output, where a search on an indexed column will
be sequential because the planner treats the search value as TEXT rather
than CHAR( 9 ).
Are you saying that no one believes there is a performance difference?
Amazing ...
Tom, I've privately eMailed you access instructions to one of my DB
servers, so you can see for yourself.
--
Mail to my list address MUST be sent via the mailing list.
All other mail to my list address will bounce.
