Re: Add generate_series(date,date) and generate_series(date,date,integer)

From: Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Torsten Zuehlsdorff <mailinglists(at)toco-domains(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Add generate_series(date,date) and generate_series(date,date,integer)
Date: 2016-03-10 16:02:43
Message-ID: CADkLM=d57abC1j1+5t2Uim6JkRGBHx5fRgFabkwUcVmJ3VgAOA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > On 10 March 2016 at 06:53, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 12:13 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> >> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> >> > Robert Haas wrote:
> >> >> I'm pretty meh about the whole idea of this function, though,
> >> >> actually, and I don't see a single clear +1 vote for this
> >> >> functionality upthread. (Apologies if I've missed one.) In the
> >> >> absence of a few of those, I recommend we reject this.
> >> >
> >> > +1
> >>
> >> I'm meh for this patch.
> >
> >
> > "meh" == +1
> >
> > I thought it meant -1
>
> In my case it meant, like, -0.5. I don't really like adding lots of
> utility functions like this to the default install, because I'm not
> sure how widely they get used and it gradually increases the size of
> the code, system catalogs, etc. But I also don't want to block
> genuinely useful things. So basically, I'm not excited about this
> patch, but I don't want to fight about it either.
>
> --
> Robert Haas
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>

New patch for Alvaro's consideration.

Very minor changes since the last time, the explanations below are
literally longer than the changes:
- Rebased, though I don't think any of the files had changed in the mean
time
- Removed infinity checks/errors and the test cases to match
- Amended documentation to add 'days' after 'step' as suggested
- Did not add a period as suggested, to remain consistent with other
descriptions in the same sgml table
- Altered test case and documentation of 7 day step example so that the
generated dates do not land evenly on the end date. A reader might
incorrectly infer that the end date must be in the result set, when it
doesn't have to be.
- Removed unnecessary indentation that existed purely due to following of
other generate_series implementations

Attachment Content-Type Size
generate_series_date.v3.diff text/plain 7.6 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2016-03-10 16:02:45 Re: create opclass documentation outdated
Previous Message Petr Jelinek 2016-03-10 16:00:36 Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering