| From: | Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: hstore ==> and deprecate => |
| Date: | 2010-06-12 14:15:54 |
| Message-ID: | E2283B6E-C838-4AE7-A6F7-8C4A8E611D14@phlo.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Jun 12, 2010, at 14:57 , Tom Lane wrote:
> But actually, there's another issue here: hstore defines not one but
> three => operators:
>
> text => text yields hstore (with 1 element)
> text[] => text[] yields hstore (with N elements)
> hstore => text[] yields hstore (subset)
>
> It's reasonable to say that the first two are bad design, but I'm
> a bit less willing to say that the last one is. What shall we
> do with that?
Hm, the last one seems to be more akin to
hstore - text yields hstore (key removed)
hstore - text[] yields hstore (keys in array removed)
hstore - hstore yields hstore (keys in hstore removed)
since it's not a constructor like the first two, but rather an (intersection-like) operation on an existing hstore.
Inspired by the already existing
hstore ?& text[] yields boolean (true if set of keys subset of array)
I suggest
hstore & text[]
as a replacement.
best regards,
Florian Pflug
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Baros | 2010-06-12 14:17:08 | GSoC - Materialized Views - is stale or fresh? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-06-12 12:57:42 | Re: hstore ==> and deprecate => |