Re: Identifying no-op length coercions

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Alexey Klyukin" <alexk(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Jim Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
Cc: "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Noah Misch" <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>,"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Identifying no-op length coercions
Date: 2011-06-03 16:12:19
Message-ID: 4DE8C193020000250003E0B6@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> wrote:

> The only challenge I see is numeric; we'd need to ensure that both
> size and precision are not decreasing.

To be picky, wouldn't that need to be "neither (precision - scale)
nor scale is decreasing"?

-Kevin

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-06-03 16:13:04 Re: About bug #6049
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-06-03 16:11:30 Re: Change 'pg_ctl: no server running' Exit Status to 3