Re: [HACKERS] Interesting behaviour ! - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Lockhart
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Interesting behaviour !
Date
Msg-id 378CC8D3.A9CDD470@alumni.caltech.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Interesting behaviour !  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Interesting behaviour !
List pgsql-hackers
> This might be a relatively simple bug to fix after all,
> but it needs more time to find exactly where things are going wrong...
> and I have to get some Real Work done...

Don't let me stop anyone from looking at this, but fyi this is the one
area I didn't yet touch for the "transparent type coersion" work I did
for v6.4 and which is still ongoing of course. 

istm that wherever index use is evaluated one could allow
pre-evaluated functions on constants, rather than just strict
constants as is the case now. There is a precedent for pre-evaluation
of elements of the query tree.

If function calls are allowed, then we can try coercing constants
using these existing coersion functions, at least when the target
column is a "superset type" of the constant. You still run into
trouble for cases like
 select intcol from table1 where intcol < 2.5;
                  - Thomas

-- 
Thomas Lockhart                lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Lockhart
Date:
Subject: Re: Arrays versus 'type constant' syntax
Next
From: "Morris, Sam@EDD"
Date:
Subject: Authentication - To do