X-Original-To: pgsql-patches-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92B3B52974 for ; Tue, 31 May 2005 19:02:02 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 92065-05 for ; Tue, 31 May 2005 22:02:00 +0000 (GMT) Received: from joeconway.com (wsip-24-249-201-67.sd.sd.cox.net [24.249.201.67]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9C3552806 for ; Tue, 31 May 2005 19:01:58 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [206.19.64.3] (account jconway HELO [172.16.1.115]) by joeconway.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP-TLS id 2875110; Tue, 31 May 2005 15:59:31 -0700 Message-ID: <429CDED8.8010704@joeconway.com> Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 15:02:00 -0700 From: Joe Conway User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050513 Fedora/1.7.8-1.3.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Lane Cc: "Patches (PostgreSQL)" , Markus Bertheau Subject: Re: [SQL] ARRAY() returning NULL instead of ARRAY[] resp. References: <1116873219.7306.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <42923762.7010708@joeconway.com> <16774.1116907560@sss.pgh.pa.us> <42961E44.7040701@joeconway.com> <429CD7A4.7020702@joeconway.com> <7686.1117576683@sss.pgh.pa.us> In-Reply-To: <7686.1117576683@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.048 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200505/405 X-Sequence-Number: 15732 Tom Lane wrote: > Joe Conway writes: > >>>+ Oid element_type = planstate->ps_ResultTupleSlot->tts_tupleDescriptor->attrs[0]->atttypid; > > > Hmm, that makes me itch ... it seems like unwarranted familiarity with > the innards of the subplan; not only as to where it keeps things, but > when things have been initialized. Perhaps we have no choice, but isn't > the datatype available on the current plan level? > I poked around a bit, and that was the best I could come up with. I'll take another look. Joe