Re: [BUGS] [HACKERS] [Resend: Domains and function]

2004-02-20 Thread elein
The reason it is a bug rather than an unimplemented feature is that it pokes a hole in the effectiveness of domains. What good is a domain if it cannot be enforced everywhere you use it? That is like having a hole in referential integrity. (Though I admit not many people will run into this until

Re: [BUGS] [HACKERS] [Resend: Domains and function]

2004-02-20 Thread elein
Right. Sorry. My brain was over on parameter issues and I did not reread my original bug... On Fri, Feb 20, 2004 at 01:03:08PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > elein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Shouldn't all function calls go (through fast path or fmgr > > or the language manager?) to a centralized p

Re: [BUGS] [HACKERS] [Resend: Domains and function]

2004-02-20 Thread Tom Lane
elein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Shouldn't all function calls go (through fast path or fmgr > or the language manager?) to a centralized parameter marshalling? We're talking about what happens inside the function, not how you pass parameters to it. regards, tom lane

Re: [BUGS] [HACKERS] [Resend: Domains and function]

2004-02-20 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Treat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > so ISTM that your example is certainly a deficiency if not a bug. I believe it is a bug or at least an unimplemented feature in plpgsql: plpgsql has its own implementation of casting, and is not aware that casting to a domain should involve running check