Re: Ltree syntax improvement

From: Nikita Glukhov <n(dot)gluhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Dmitry Belyavsky <beldmit(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Nikolay Shaplov <dhyan(at)nataraj(dot)su>
Subject: Re: Ltree syntax improvement
Date: 2020-04-02 13:16:06
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 02.04.2020 2:46, Tom Lane wrote:

> Nikita Glukhov <n(dot)gluhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> writes:
>> [ latest version of ltree syntax extension ]
> This is going to need another rebase after all the other ltree hacking
> that just got done. However, I did include 0001 (use a switch) in
> the commit I just pushed, so you don't need to worry about that.
> regards, tom lane

Rebased patch attached.

I’m not sure whether it's worth to introduce one LTREE_TOK_SPECIAL for
the whole set of special characters, and still check them with t_iseq().

Nikita Glukhov
Postgres Professional:
The Russian Postgres Company

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-Ltree-syntax-improvements-20200402.patch text/x-patch 68.7 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-04-02 13:19:28 Re: Resolving the python 2 -> python 3 mess
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2020-04-02 13:10:51 Re: WAL usage calculation patch