| 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 22:14:33 |
| Message-ID: | 20200420221433.GA21139@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-Apr-20, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > 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.
>
> Well, I wouldn't say it was discarded --- but there sure wasn't
> a groundswell of support.
Ah.
> Looking at it again, I'd be inclined not to bother with the
> morerows trick but just to have an operator name entry in each row.
> This table is a bit of an outlier anyway, I'm finding --- very few
> of the operator tables have multiple entries per operator name.
No disagreement here. 'morerows' attribs are always a messy business.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2020-04-20 23:04:06 | Re: DETACH PARTITION and FOR EACH ROW triggers on partitioned tables |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-04-20 21:50:19 | Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign? |