Hello,
> There is no pg_sleep(text) function and the cast is unknown->double
> precision.
My mistake.
As I understand it, pg_sleep('12') currently works and would not anymore
once your patch is applied. That is the concern raised by Robert Haas.
>> ISTM that providing "pg_sleep(TEXT)" cleanly resolves the
>> upward-compatibility issue raised.
>
> I don't like this idea at all. If we don't want to break compatibility
> for callers that quote the value, I would rather the patch be rejected
> outright.
That was just a suggestion, and I was trying to help. ISTM that if
Robert's concern is not addressed one way or another, you will just get
"rejected" on this basis.
--
Fabien.
