Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not entirely convinced by this one. Does that mean expressions like this
> would throw an error if col1 was declared as a numeric(1)?
> ARRAY[col1] || 10
No, because the result of the || operator won't have a specific typmod.
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ArrayExpr: should adopt the same behavior as Coalesce and
> similar nodes, ie, if all the elements show the
> same type/typmod then return that typmod
> instead of -1
...
> Commen
A month or so back I wrote:
> BTW, I think a good case could be made that the core of the problem
> is exactly that struct Const doesn't carry typmod, and thus that we
> lose information about constructs like 'foo'::char(7). We should fix
> that, and also anywhere else in the expression tree struc
