On 2014-01-06 10:29:06 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > Does anybody have an opinion about introducing generic pseudotype IO > > functions? > > Yes: -1.
Ok, fine with me. > > Pseudotype.c/pg_proc.h are slowly growing a number of pretty > > useless/redundant copy&pasted functions... Most for cases that are > > pretty damn unlikely to be hit by users not knowing what they do. > > That's hardly the largest cost associated with inventing a new pseudotype. > Nor are there lots of new pseudotypes coming down the pike, anyway. Robert suggested modelling the lookup of changeset extraction output callbacks after fdw's FdwRoutine, that's why I am wondering about it. I noticed while reviewing that I so far had borrowed fdw's C routines which didn't seem like such a nice thing to do... > > What about adding a pseudotype_in/out that just error out with a generic > > message? > > This will break some of the function sanity checks in opr_sanity, > I believe. Yeah, we could lobotomize that, but I don't see any benefit. Yes. But there's precedent in refcursor using text's routines... (it's in type_sanity, but whatever) Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
