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

Re: BUG #6530: intarray documentation could do with a warning about operators

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: kontakt(at)sandberg-consult(dot)dk, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #6530: intarray documentation could do with a warning about operators
Date: 2012-04-09 16:16:29
Message-ID: 8741.1333988189@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> We do have this:

>   <para>
>    The operators <literal>&amp;&amp;</>, <literal>@&gt;</> and
>    <literal>&lt;@</> are equivalent to <productname>PostgreSQL</>'s built-in
>    operators of the same names, except that they work only on integer arrays
>    that do not contain nulls, while the built-in operators work for any array
>    type.  This restriction makes them faster than the built-in operators
>    in many cases.
>   </para>

> But maybe some more explicit warning is needed.  Not sure exactly what.

I think the gripe is basically that, while these operators might be
equivalent to the built-in ones as far as results go, they are not
equivalent in terms of their ability to match to indexes.  But not
sure how we turn that observation into useful documentation.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Kasper SandbergDate: 2012-04-09 16:21:56
Subject: Re: BUG #6530: intarray documentation could do with a warning about operators
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2012-04-09 16:15:47
Subject: Re: BUG #6545: le telechargement ne s acheve pas

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