Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pgsql-server: Some preliminary documentation for composite-type stuff.

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>
Cc: pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgsql-server: Some preliminary documentation for composite-type stuff.
Date: 2004-06-07 04:52:10
Message-ID: 24299.1086583930@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> writes:
> Nice work.  This is a cool unexpected step forward in functionality.

As recently as Thursday I didn't think this would get done for 7.5,
but I wanted to nibble off a few rough edges, and after a while there
weren't any left.

Or almost ... I just noticed that there's no convenient way to assign to
a subfield in UPDATE.  You can hack around it with something like
	UPDATE mytab SET myfield = ROW(myfield.a, newval, myfield.c)
but my goodness that's painful.  AFAICS the SQL99 spec gives license
to write
	UPDATE mytab SET myfield.b = newval
and I think I will look into making that happen tomorrow.  We already
have a solution in place for assigning to an array element, and this
doesn't seem much different.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-committers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-06-07 05:20:03
Subject: Re: pgsql-server: Minor catalog cleanups for composite-type
Previous:From: Christopher Kings-LynneDate: 2004-06-07 04:49:34
Subject: Re: pgsql-server: Minor catalog cleanups for composite-type

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group