Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I think you should pick a new operator name, not try to reuse %. > On second thought, it could use overloading distinguished with > different argument types, so it doesn't need a different name, but I > don't know if it is a good idea to use that overloading. I would vote for overloading; there's no risk of confusion that I can see. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
