Thomas Hallgren <thomas@tada.se> writes:
> Would it be hard to enforce a real check? The implementation could use
> GUC settings like 'enforce_array_dimensions' and 'enforce_array_lengths'
> that could be set to false for the legacy implementations that rely on
> the current behavior.
The fact that it doesn't exactly match Java semantics does not make it
"legacy behavior". I don't agree that it's a bug; I think it's a
feature, precisely because many functions can work on arrays of
different dimensions. Why should we change to make PL/Java happier,
when it will move us further away from the semantics of, say, PL/R?
I think reasonable choices for PL/Java would be to reject
multidimensional array arguments, or to silently ignore the
dimensionality and treat the data as 1-D in storage order
(as I think plperl for instance already does).
regards, tom lane
