Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
>>Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>>
>>>This has been saved for the 8.2 release:
>>> http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold
>>
>>Uh, why do we need this at all? "NOT (tid = tid)" covers the
>>functionality already.
>
>
> tid should be a fully functional type, at least for = and !=.
>
>
>>I disagree strongly with renumbering existing hand-assigned OIDs for
>>this. There's too much risk of breakage and no benefit.
>
>
> Agreed.
>
>
>>Also, you forgot to add the negator cross-links between the operators.
>
>
> OK.
>
I'll redo the patch taking these points into account.
Cheers
Mark
