RE: plpgsql and intarray extension; int[] - int[] operator does notexist ? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Day, David
Subject RE: plpgsql and intarray extension; int[] - int[] operator does notexist ?
Date
Msg-id 0074b666251d4e6c8fdae9a4927f4ca2@exch-02.redcom.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: plpgsql and intarray extension; int[] - int[] operator does not exist ?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
Tom

I was thinking something similar after finding that my test function recreated in the problematic schema would execute
correctly
As one user-role but not another and that they had different search_path settings.

After adding public to search patch for that role all was good.

The error message "no operator matches the given name and argument type....." does not make me easily come around to a
searchpath issue. 
In any event thanks much for the assistance.


Issue resolved.


Dave




-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 12:56 PM
To: Day, David <david.day@redcom.com>
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: plpgsql and intarray extension; int[] - int[] operator does not exist ?

"Day, David" <david.day@redcom.com> writes:
> Any suggestions as to why the int[] operations are not understood in the trigger context.?

The search_path in the trigger probably doesn't include public.
You could add a "SET search_path = whatever" clause to the trigger function definition to ensure it runs with a
predictablepath. 

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: plpgsql and intarray extension; int[] - int[] operator does not exist ?
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: pgconf eu 2018 slides entry missing fromhttps://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_Related_Slides_and_Presentations