Re: Per-column collation, work in progress
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2010-10-21T20:31:50Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: >> We already have TypeName as a structure that contains type and typmod >> (and collation, in my patch). We could make that a primnode instead of >> a parsenode, and use it in more places, or we could make a new leaner >> structure that only contains the numeric info. > > TypeName per se is completely inappropriate for use beyond the first > stage of parsing, because it requires catalog lookups to make any sense > of. I think the post-parsing representation should still start with a > type OID. I can agree with replacing typmod with a struct, though. I think we should have both the type OID and the typmod in the struct. Carrying the type OID separately from the typmod has caused us enough heartache already. No? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company