Re: Issue with custom operator in simple case

On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 at 19:28, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> Maxim Orlov <orlovmg@gmail.com> writes:
> > 1) Can this behaviour, in the case described above, when after dump and
> > recovery we receive different data, be considered correct?
>
> It's undesirable, for sure.
>
> > 4) Does it make sense to extend the "simple case" grammar so that it can
> > accept a custom operator?
>
> This has been discussed before, see e.g. [1][2].  Unfortunately CASE
>
> [1]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20141009200031.25464.53769%40wrigleys.postgresql.org
> [2]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/10492.1531515255%40sss.pgh.pa.us#8755318d9b16ec32296398f0893a44d7


Thank you for pointing this out. I'll have to read those discussions.


-- 
Best regards,
Maxim Orlov.