Re: Fixes for missing schema qualifications

From: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com
Cc: ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp, noah(at)leadboat(dot)com, michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Fixes for missing schema qualifications
Date: 2018-03-14 00:26:15
Message-ID: 20180314.092615.1619108768998317925.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>> select pg_catalog.count(*) from pg_catalog.pg_namespace where
>> pg_catalog.nameeq(nspname, '%s');
>>
>>
> ​I'd rather write that:
>
> select [...] where nspname operator(pg_catalog.=) '%s'​
>
> Introducing undocumented implementation functions to these queries is
> undesirable; and besides, indexing and equivalence relies on operators and
> not the underlying functions so there would be some risk of performance
> issues if the functions were used directly.

Thanks. Yours looks much better.

Next question is, should we update the manual? There are bunch of
places where example queries are shown without schema qualifications.

Best regards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2018-03-14 00:27:40 ExplainProperty* and units
Previous Message David Rowley 2018-03-14 00:20:15 Re: [HACKERS] Removing [Merge]Append nodes which contain a single subpath