On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 4:27 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > In [1] I wrote > > >>> I'm a little concerned about the cost-benefit of fixing the reg* types. > >>> The ones that accept type names actually use the core grammar to parse > >>> those. Now, we probably could fix the grammar to be non-throwing, but > >>> it'd be very invasive and I'm not sure about the performance impact. > >>> It might be best to content ourselves with soft reporting of lookup > >>> failures, as opposed to syntax problems.
Ah right. I agree that invading the main grammar doesn't seem terribly appealing. Setting regtypein aside could be a sensible choice, then. Another option might be to have some way of parsing type names outside of the main grammar, which would be more work and would require keeping things in sync, but perhaps it would end up being less ugly.... -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
