| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: multiset patch review |
| Date: | 2011-02-04 18:18:28 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTinoMDfgyJTouKu-pp+qvoZvf=mBcQEVu6nndG6v@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Itagaki Takahiro
<itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 03:04, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>> I am still not in favor of adding this syntax.
>>>
>>> I also don't like the syntax, but unfortunately, almost all of
>>> them are in the SQL standard :-(.
>>
>> The standard specifies this syntax for arrays, or for multisets?
>
> Multisets. But I chose the same function name and syntax because
> arrays *are* multisets by definition.
In math class, maybe. But in programming, no. Multiset is a
datatype. Array is a different datatype. There is no reason why we
need to clutter our parser with extra keywords to support a
non-standard feature extension.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Smith | 2011-02-04 18:31:44 | Linux filesystem performance and checkpoint sorting |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-02-04 18:16:10 | Re: more buildfarm breakage |