Re: proposal - function string_to_table

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca" <movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: proposal - function string_to_table
Date: 2020-08-24 16:33:34
Message-ID: CAFj8pRD9cYeQGQCP=K8+m+zitRidb=+B3YD764bLYP65V4mXwQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

po 24. 8. 2020 v 4:19 odesílatel Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> napsal:

> I have re-checked the string_to_table_20200821.patch.
>
> Below is one remaining problem.
>
> ====
>
> COMMENT (help text)
>
> + Splits the <parameter>string</parameter> at occurrences
> + of <parameter>delimiter</parameter> and forms the remaining data
> + into a table with one <type>text</type> type column.
> + If <parameter>delimiter</parameter> is <literal>NULL</literal>,
> + each character in the <parameter>string</parameter> will become a
> + separate element in the array.
>
> Seems like here is a cut/paste error from the string_to_array help text.
>
> "separate element in the array" should say "separate row of the table"
>

fixed

> ====
>
> >>> Maybe a different choice of function name would be more consistent
> >>> with what is already there?
> >>> e.g. split_to_table, string_split_to_table, etc.
> >>
> >> I don't agree. This function is twin (with almost identical behaviour)
> for "string_to_array" function, so I think so the name is correct.
>
> OK
>
> ====
>

please, check attached patch

Regards

Pavel

> Kind Regards,
> Peter Smith.
> Fujitsu Australia
>

Attachment Content-Type Size
string_to_table-20200824.patch text/x-patch 37.7 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrey M. Borodin 2020-08-24 17:30:19 Re: recovering from "found xmin ... from before relfrozenxid ..."
Previous Message Dilip Kumar 2020-08-24 16:10:49 Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions