On Mon, Aug 17, 2026 at 09:33:01AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Probably a mistake, but it's of no consequence. These all take
> type internal so they can't be called from SQL; if they could be,
> the hazards from passing a not-NULL pointer would be far worse
> than what happens with a NULL. I can't get excited about doing
> work to change it.
Of course, I just mean that as an extra defense-in-depth failures so
as these can never be reused for holes similar of the internal
business dealt with recently, in terms of dereference, and because
NULL opclass options are the same as nothing as far as my
understanding of the backend goes.
If you don't feel strongly about this proposal, that's fine by me.
--
Michael
