Re: [PATCH] pg_sleep(interval) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: [PATCH] pg_sleep(interval)
Date
Msg-id 52601414.9000807@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] pg_sleep(interval)  (Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@dalibo.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] pg_sleep(interval)  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Robert,

> Obviously, the implicit casts are not for PostgreSQL and would be
> rightly rejected here, but I am not sure that the ability to prefer
> one function or operator over others in an overloading situation is
> such a bad idea.  So far, our internal testing seems to show that it
> works well and doesn't break things.

Hmmm.  Is this better to do on the cast level or the function level?
For the case discussed, it would be sufficient to have a way to mark a
particular function signature as "preferred" in cases of ambiguity, and
that would be a lot less likely to have side effects.  Mind you, fixing
the cast in general would fix far more annoying cases, but I also see it
as something which would be very hard to get correct ...

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: removing old ports and architectures
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem