From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Domains and arrays and composites, oh my
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 15:03:38 -0400
Message-ID: <13131.1506625418@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <044f3a1c-9e20-c08b-8f78-c47aa41d7a0c@2ndQuadrant.com>
References: <4206.1499798337@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<12364.1499973554@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<aaaa73ea-4d5f-ed8c-7222-06a2d5f2891e@2ndQuadrant.com>
<32440.1506618167@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<044f3a1c-9e20-c08b-8f78-c47aa41d7a0c@2ndQuadrant.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 09/28/2017 01:02 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I do think that treating a function returning a domain-over-composite
>>> differently from one returning a base composite is a POLA. We'd be very
>>> hard put to explain the reasons for it to an end user.
>> Do you have any thoughts about how we ought to resolve that?
> Not offhand. Maybe we need to revisit the decision not to modify the
> executor at all.
I think it's more of a parse analysis change: the issue is whether to
smash a function's result type to base when determining whether it emits
columns. Maybe we could just do that in that context, and otherwise leave
domains alone.
> One thought I had was that we could invent a new return
> type of TYPEFUNC_DOMAIN_COMPOSITE so there would be less danger of a PL
> just treating it as an unconstrained base type as it might do if it saw
> TYPEFUNC_COMPOSITE.
Hmm. That would be a way of forcing the issue, no doubt ...
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com
Subject: Re: Domains and arrays and composites, oh my
In-Reply-To: <13131.1506625418@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox