Re: [mmoncure@gmail.com: Re: [GENERAL] array_to_set functions]

TODO item?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Michael Glaesemann wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
>
> On Aug 8, 2007, at 12:18 , Decibel! wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 12:03:34PM -0500, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
> >> Personally, I think expandarray is more appropriate and its
> >> functionality probably more generally useful, as it identifies the
> >> array indices as well. Note you can also rename the columns.
> >
> > Sure. My point is that we should have a way to convert arrays to sets
> > and back in the backend.
>
> Can't really argue with you there, as I find array_accum myself.
> (Though I'd still nit-pick that this isn't an array to set
> conversion, but rather array to--possibly single-column--table.)
>
> Michael Glaesemann
> grzm seespotcode net
>
>
-- End of PGP section, PGP failed!

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +