Thread: BUG #6202: type of union column selection bug

BUG #6202: type of union column selection bug

From
"Roman"
Date:
The following bug has been logged online:

Bug reference:      6202
Logged by:          Roman
Email address:      zotov@oe-it.ru
PostgreSQL version: 9.0.4
Operating system:   Win7x64
Description:        type of union column selection bug
Details:

Query
select null union select 4
is Ok but
select null union select null union select 4
is Fail

i think it`s a bug because you choose type in second query twice
null and null -> text
text and int -> fail

and i think what check type category is not true, because i can`t create
implicit cast to resolve some problems, like
select 'a' union select 4
if i have implicit cast int->text i think it must work!!

Sorry second part is not bug it`s a feature but it`s my problem too

Re: BUG #6202: type of union column selection bug

From
Robert Haas
Date:
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Roman <zotov@oe-it.ru> wrote:
> Query
> select null union select 4
> is Ok but
> select null union select null union select 4
> is Fail
>
> i think it`s a bug because you choose type in second query twice
> null and null -> text
> text and int -> fail

Yeah, this is lousy.  Unfortunately, it's also not easy to fix, so I
think we're stuck with it for now.  You can fix it by casting the NULL
constants to int, e.g.:

SELECT null::int4 UNION SELECT null::int4 UNION SELECT 4

> and i think what check type category is not true, because i can`t create
> implicit cast to resolve some problems, like
> select 'a' union select 4
> if i have implicit cast int->text i think it must work!!
>
> Sorry second part is not bug it`s a feature but it`s my problem too

Sadly, I don't think that'll work - the undecorated literal is going
to be treated as "unknown", not text.  Implicitly casting int to text
is maybe not a good idea; we removed those casts on purpose in
PostgreSQL 8.3.  But if you want to restore (much of) the pre-8.3
behavior, you might want to have a look at this blog post:

http://petereisentraut.blogspot.com/2008/03/readding-implicit-casts-in-postgresql.html

But in this case I think you're likely to still need a cast in there somewhere.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company