Re: xpath processing brain dead

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: James Pye <lists(at)jwp(dot)name>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Nikolay Samokhvalov <samokhvalov(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: xpath processing brain dead
Date: 2009-02-28 14:53:47
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

James Pye wrote:
> sigh.. I got curious. :P
> On Feb 27, 2009, at 7:19 PM, James Pye wrote:
>> Well, that or force the user to call it explicitly.
> Attached is the patch that I used to get the results below..
> This is just a proof of concept, so it's quite lacking. Notably, it
> doesn't even try to identify well-formed documents.

This is entirely out of the question for 8.3, as it's a significant
change of behaviour.

I'd also want to see this usage blessed by some xpath guru ... I'm not
sure it meets the standard's requirements, but I could be wrong.

And it seems to me much better to provide the facility as a separate
function e.g. xpath_fragment() (if at all) rather than by adding on a
non-standard xpath function, but that's just a first impression.

Nice piece of work, though.



In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-02-28 17:20:04 encoding conversion functions versus zero-length inputs
Previous Message Gregory Stark 2009-02-28 13:31:28 Re: would it be a lot of work, to add optimizations accross unions ?