"Timmer, Marius" <marius.tim...@uni-muenster.de> writes: > We think, you wanted to switch to DESC behavior > (print out NULLS FIRST) in cases, where > USING uses an operator which is considered to be > a DESC operator.
Right, because that's how addTargetToSortList() would parse it. > But get_equality_op_for_ordering_op is called in > cases, where reverse is false, but > the part > if (reverse) > *reverse = (strategy == BTGreaterStrategyNumber); > never changes this to true? Sorry, not following? It's true that what I added to explain.c doesn't worry too much about the possibility of get_ordering_op_properties() failing --- that really shouldn't happen for something that was previously accepted as a sorting operator. But if it does, "reverse" will just be left as false, so the behavior will anyway be unsurprising I think. We could alternatively make it throw a "cache lookup failed" error but I'm not sure how that makes anyone's life better. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers