From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: patch: bytea_agg |
Date: | 2011-12-23 21:19:57 |
Message-ID: | 7924.1324675197@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>> On fre, 2011-12-23 at 13:30 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> Well, because it doesn't operate on strings.
>> Sure, binary strings. Both the SQL standard and the PostgreSQL
>> documentation use that term.
> I'm unimpressed by that argument, but let's see what other people think.
I generally agree with Peter: string_agg makes sense here. The only
real argument against it is Pavel's point that he didn't include a
delimiter parameter, but that just begs the question why not. It
seems at least plausible that there would be use-cases for it.
So I think we should try to make this as much like the text case as
possible.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-12-23 21:22:01 | Re: WIP: explain analyze with 'rows' but not timing |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-12-23 20:25:57 | Re: Page Checksums + Double Writes |