I wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Well, that argues for the choice of trying to make them equivalent
again, I suppose, but it sounds like there are some nasty edge cases
that won't easily be filed down. I think your idea of redefining
funcvariadic to be true only for
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
There's also the point that even if we changed ruleutils' behavior
now, this would not fix existing dump files that have considered the
two forms interchangeable ever since VARIADIC
In bug #9817 there's a complaint that the planner fails to consider
these expressions equivalent:
foo('a'::text, 'b'::text)
foo(variadic array['a'::text, 'b'::text])
when foo() is declared as taking variadic text[].
Such cases worked okay before 9.3, the reason being that the use of
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In bug #9817 there's a complaint that the planner fails to consider
these expressions equivalent:
foo('a'::text, 'b'::text)
foo(variadic array['a'::text, 'b'::text])
when foo() is declared as taking variadic
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In bug #9817 there's a complaint that the planner fails to consider
these expressions equivalent:
foo('a'::text, 'b'::text)
foo(variadic array['a'::text, 'b'::text])
when foo() is
On 2014-04-01 12:52:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
We could possibly salvage something by redefining funcvariadic as only
being true if VARIADIC was used *and* the function is VARIADIC ANY,
so that it returns to not being different for semantically-equivalent
cases. This would be a bit messy,
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2014-04-01 12:52:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
We could possibly salvage something by redefining funcvariadic as only
being true if VARIADIC was used *and* the function is VARIADIC ANY,
so that it returns to not being different for
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In bug #9817 there's a complaint that the planner fails to consider
these expressions equivalent:
foo('a'::text,
