Re: Ltree syntax improvement

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Dmitry Belyavsky <beldmit(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nikolay Shaplov <dhyan(at)nataraj(dot)su>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Ltree syntax improvement
Date: 2019-07-08 20:33:03
Message-ID: 20190708203303.GA17993@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019-Jul-08, Dmitry Belyavsky wrote:

> I did not introduce any functions. I've just changed the parser.

I mean the C-level functions -- count_parts_ors() and so on.

> I'm not sure that it makes sense to remove any tests as most of them were
> written to catch really happened bugs during the implementation.

Well, I don't mean to decrease the coverage, only to condense a lot of
little tests in a small powerful test.

Álvaro Herrera
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nikita Glukhov 2019-07-08 20:38:07 Re: Add missing operator <->(box, point)
Previous Message Konstantin Knizhnik 2019-07-08 20:30:06 Re: Built-in connection pooler