| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Victor Yegorov <vyegorov(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign? |
| Date: | 2020-04-20 21:31:41 |
| Message-ID: | 20200420213140.GA29785@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-Apr-20, Tom Lane wrote:
> Victor Yegorov <vyegorov(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > While table 9.5 with functions looks quite nice, I quite dislike 9.4 with
> > operators.
> > Previously, I could lookup operator in the leftmost column and read on.
> > Right now I have to look through the whole table (well, not really, but
> > still) to find the operator.
>
> Aside from the alternatives already discussed,
There's one with a separate column for the operator, without types, at
the left (the "with names" example at
https://postgr.es/m/14380.1587242177@sss.pgh.pa.us ). That seemed
pretty promising -- not sure why it was discarded.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2020-04-20 21:45:11 | Re: new heapcheck contrib module |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2020-04-20 21:14:49 | Re: new heapcheck contrib module |