Awhile back I wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> FWIW, is the attached patch about what you had in mind? (It probably only
>> covers "normal" types at the moment.)
> Hm, I hadn't realized that it would take as little work as that ...
> I have an itchy feeling that you misse
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Where are we on this?
>
> Since there weren't any objections, I guess we can do it ;-)
>
> I'll try to do something with Peter's patch plus removing the deadwood.
> Would you add his patch to the queue so I don't forget?
Added.
--
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Where are we on this?
Since there weren't any objections, I guess we can do it ;-)
I'll try to do something with Peter's patch plus removing the deadwood.
Would you add his patch to the queue so I don't forget?
regards, tom lane
Where are we on this?
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > FWIW, is the attached patch about what you had in mind? (It probably only
> > covers "normal" types at the moment.)
>
> Hm, I ha
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> FWIW, is the attached patch about what you had in mind? (It probably only
> covers "normal" types at the moment.)
Hm, I hadn't realized that it would take as little work as that ...
I have an itchy feeling that you missed something but I'm not sure
Peter,
Which precise implicit casts are we breaking? Can we provide an exact list in
the release notes?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
Am Montag, 2. April 2007 18:41 schrieb Tom Lane:
> >> The scheme that was in the back of my mind was to do this at the same
> >> time as providing a general facility for casting *every* type to and
> >> from text, by means of their I/O functions if no specialized cast is
> >> provided in pg_cast.
Am Dienstag, 3. April 2007 17:17 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
> I assumed the issue was that there might not be explicit casts for every
> case were were now disallowing.
My proposal is to "downgrade" some casts from implicit to assignment. Tom's
proposal is to add more casts at the level of explicit,
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Montag, 2. April 2007 18:41 schrieb Tom Lane:
> > Certainly they'd all be explicit-only. ?From a technical perspective
> > there's no need to do the two things at the same time; I'm just opining
> > that we could sell it easier if we did them together. ?If we just do
>
Am Montag, 2. April 2007 18:41 schrieb Tom Lane:
> Certainly they'd all be explicit-only. From a technical perspective
> there's no need to do the two things at the same time; I'm just opining
> that we could sell it easier if we did them together. If we just do
> this part, what users will see i
Added to TODO:
* Allow all data types to cast to and from TEXT
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-04/msg00017.php
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The attached patch
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Am Montag, 2. April 2007 09:17 schrieb Tom Lane:
>> The scheme that was in the back of my mind was to do this at the same
>> time as providing a general facility for casting *every* type to and
>> from text, by means of their I/O functions if no specia
Am Montag, 2. April 2007 09:17 schrieb Tom Lane:
> The scheme that was in the back of my mind was to do this at the same
> time as providing a general facility for casting *every* type to and
> from text, by means of their I/O functions if no specialized cast is
> provided in pg_cast. This would i
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The attached patch changes all implicit casts to text to assignment and
> cleans up the associated regression test damage. This change has been
> discussed for the longest time; I propose that we bite the bullet and
> do it now.
[ I'm assuming thi
14 matches
Mail list logo
