From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
To: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: select_common_typmod
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 18:12:05 +0100
Message-ID: <adf469d0-cbe2-1890-12c1-d5268d7b53ac@2ndquadrant.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3152222d-4792-d75b-46a8-de22ebb0de31@iki.fi>
References: <97df3af9-8b5e-fb7f-a029-3eb7e80d7af9@2ndquadrant.com>
<3152222d-4792-d75b-46a8-de22ebb0de31@iki.fi>
On 2020-10-26 10:05, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> There might have been a tiny bug in transformValuesClause() because
>> while consolidating the typmods it does not take into account whether
>> the types are actually the same (as more correctly done in
>> transformSetOperationTree() and buildMergedJoinVar()).
>
> Hmm, it seems so, but I could not come up with a test case to reach that
> codepath. I think you'd need to create two types in the same
> typcategory, but with different and incompatible typmod formats.
Yeah, something like that.
> The patch also adds typmod resolution for hypothetical ordered-set
> aggregate arguments. I couldn't come up with a test case that would
> tickle that codepath either, but it seems like a sensible change. You
> might want to mention it in the commit message though.
OK, committed with that.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
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: peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com, hlinnaka@iki.fi
Subject: Re: select_common_typmod
In-Reply-To: <adf469d0-cbe2-1890-12c1-d5268d7b53ac@2ndquadrant.com>
* 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