On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Two reasons this isn't terribly compelling are (1) it's creating a > join in a place where the planner can't possibly see it and optimize > it, and (2) you risk MVCC anomalies because the reg* output routines > would not be using the same snapshot as the calling query. > > We already have problem (2) with the existing reg* functions so I'm > not that excited about doubling down on the concept.
I think I agree. I mean, I agree that this notation is more convenient, but I don't really want to add a whole new slough of types --- these will certainly not be the only ones we want once we go down this path --- to the default install just for notational convenience. It's arguable, of course, but I guess I'm going to vote against this patch. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
