On 10/04/12 21:27, Tom Lane wrote:
=?UTF-8?B?SmFuIFVyYmHFhHNraQ==?=<wulc...@wulczer.org> writes:
Yes, that would be ideal, even though not backwards-compatible.
Back-patching is out of the question, but do we want to change trigger
functions to receive dictionaries in NEW?
Hm, I was not thinking of this as being trigger-specific, but more a
general principle that composite columns of tuples ought to be handled
in a recursive fashion.
Sure, that would be the way.
If so, should this be 9.2 material, or just a TODO?
If it can be done quickly and with not much risk, I'd vote for
squeezing it into 9.2, because it seems to me to be a clear bug that the
two directions are not handled consistently. If you don't have time for
it now or you don't think it would be a small/safe patch, we'd better
just put it on TODO.
I'll see if making the conversion function recursive is easy and
independently whip up a patch to check for strings and routes them
through InputFunctionCall, for back-patching purposes.
Cheers,
Jan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
