Re: [HACKERS] I think we need an explicit parsetree node for CAST - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] I think we need an explicit parsetree node for CAST
Date
Msg-id 17946.947996562@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] I think we need an explicit parsetree node for CAST  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] I think we need an explicit parsetree node for CAST
List pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Actually, I think I never made the additional atttypmod changes because
> no one had ever reported a problem, and I was confused by that.

I think that after further discussion, we concluded that it wasn't
really possible to determine an atttypmod value to attach to the
result of most expressions.  However, CAST is a special case because
there *is* a typmod value associated with the Typename node.  The
thing I want to do is make sure we hold onto that value long enough
to use it...
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: pg_dump not in very good shape
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] INDEX_MAX_KEYS and pg_dump