Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: patch: bytea_agg

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: patch: bytea_agg
Date: 2011-12-23 18:25:07
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2011/12/23 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>:
> On ons, 2011-12-21 at 11:04 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> this patch adds a bytea_agg aggregation.
>> It allow fast bytea concatetation.
> Why not call it string_agg?  All the function names are the same between
> text and bytea (e.g., ||, substr, position, length).  It would be nice
> not to introduce arbitrary differences.

My opinion is not strong. I don't think so using string_agg is good
name (- as minimal (and only one) reason is different API - there is
no support for delimiter. If I remember well discussion about
string_agg, where delimiter is not optimal, there is request for
immutable interface for aggregates - there was a issue with ORDER
clause. So bytea_agg is good name.




In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-12-23 18:30:26
Subject: Re: patch: bytea_agg
Previous:From: Pavel StehuleDate: 2011-12-23 18:23:13
Subject: Re: patch: bytea_agg

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group