-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160
>>The solution is to write the query in an unambiguous way: >> >> SELECT $1::date + 1; >> >>which is good practice, anyway. If it's not obvious to the type >>inference system, it's probably not obvious to you, and will probably >>surprise you ;) > > That address this specific case, but it's ugly and not general. The right > thing is to set the correct type when you're marshalling the parameters... Well, ugly is in the eye of the beholder, and it certainly is a general solution. Any query with ambiguity in its parameters should explicitly declare the types, inside the query itself. Having the driver indicate the type should be the exception, not the rule. - -- Greg Sabino Mullane g...@turnstep.com End Point Corporation http://www.endpoint.com/ PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201002091811 http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
