Pavel Stehule wrote:
> It is documented already
> "If the <literal>PATH</> matches an empty tag the result is an empty string"
Hmm, okay. But what we have here is not an empty tag, but a tag that is
completely missing. I don't think those two cases should be treated in
the same way ...
> Attached new patch
> cleaned documentation
> regress tests is more robust
> appended comment in src related to generating empty string for empty tag
Thanks, I incorporated those changes. Here's v46. I rewrote the
documentation, and fixed a couple of incorrectly copied&pasted comments
in the new executor code; I think that one looks good. In the future we
could rewrite it to avoid the need for a tuplestore, but I think the
current approach is good enough for a pg10 implementation.
Barring serious problems, I intend to commit this later today.
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Masahiko Sawada||Date: 2017-03-02 17:16:32|
|Subject: Two phase commit in ECPG|
|Previous:||From: Peter Geoghegan||Date: 2017-03-02 17:08:50|
|Subject: Re: Cost model for parallel CREATE INDEX|