Re: Garbage pad bytes within datums are bad news - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Teodor Sigaev
Subject Re: Garbage pad bytes within datums are bad news
Date
Msg-id 47F6A365.7050006@sigaev.ru
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Garbage pad bytes within datums are bad news  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Garbage pad bytes within datums are bad news
List pgsql-hackers

> That still puts the responsibility on the individual datatype author to
> get it right.  The case I'm most worried about is user-written datatypes
> that are never going to magically acquire such asserts.

It seems to me that working with two assumption (binary equal and 
catalog-defined equal function) in the same time is a wrong way. If we decide to 
use binary equal criteria, then why we need catalog-defined equal at all? If we 
use catalog-defined one, why we should require binary equality? Using both way 
in the same time is an error prone. It's possible to say that two value is equal  if they are binary the same, if not -
weshould find catalog-defined equal 
 
operation and call it. Binary comparison is only an optimization.
-- 
Teodor Sigaev                                   E-mail: teodor@sigaev.ru
  WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Garbage pad bytes within datums are bad news
Next
From: "Dawid Kuroczko"
Date:
Subject: Re: psql \G command -- send query and output using extended format