From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Stehule <stehule(at)kix(dot)fsv(dot)cvut(dot)cz> |
Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Proposal: associative arrays for plpgsql (concept) |
Date: | 2005-06-29 18:40:20 |
Message-ID: | 42C2EB14.6060402@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Pavel Stehule wrote:
>On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
>
>
>>Pavel,
>>
>>
>>
>>> The concept is from Oracle 9i, but with some changes.
>>>
>>>http://www.oracle-10g.de/oracle_10g_documentation/appdev.101/b10807/05_coll
>>>s.htm#i35672
>>>
>>>
>>How does this match the SQL2003 spec?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>I don't know. What I can read about it, it's only PL/SQL feature and maybe
>reason for PL/pgSQL.
>
>I like and need
>
> a) hash arrays
> b) iteration over all items of array
>
>All I can use well in my codes.
>
>
>
>
Well, plperl and pltcl will buy you these (not to mention plruby and
even pljavascript when I get around to creating it)
That's not to say that we should not build them into plpgsql, but to
suggest that there might be reasonable alternatives.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2005-06-29 19:43:54 | Re: Open items |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-06-29 18:37:15 | Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC |