Re: Unexpected array_remove results

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Matija Lesar <matija(dot)lesar(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Unexpected array_remove results
Date: 2015-03-20 13:58:15
Message-ID: 25825.1426859895@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Matija Lesar <matija(dot)lesar(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> should not in example below array_remove return same results?

AFAICS, array_remove keeps the existing lower bound number. I don't
see anything particularly wrong with that definition.

Even if we didn't care about backwards compatibility, it would require
nontrivial effort to change it --- for example, there are several
early-exit cases that return the original array unmodified, and that would
be wrong if we were to adopt some other definition such as "force the
lower bound to 1".

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vladimir Borodin 2015-03-20 15:00:16 Re: [pgadmin-support] Issue with a hanging apply process on the replica db after vacuum works on primary
Previous Message Matija Lesar 2015-03-20 06:37:32 Unexpected array_remove results