| From: | "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: generate_iterator functions |
| Date: | 2007-10-18 14:09:36 |
| Message-ID: | 162867790710180709g144c8c62w35ae040548ce0958@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2007/10/18, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > There was a very similar proposal a little while back (google:
> > array_to_set). I think I like those names better since you are
> > returning a set, not an iterator :-).
>
> I agree, this is a very poor choice of name. There should be some
> reference to arrays in it, for one thing.
>
> generate_array_subscripts() maybe?
>
why not?
Pavel
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-10-18 14:15:00 | Re: Why copy_relation_data only use wal whenWALarchivingis enabled |
| Previous Message | Decibel! | 2007-10-18 14:09:19 | dblink un-named connection doesn't get re-used |