Re: [mmoncure@gmail.com: Re: [GENERAL] array_to_set functions]

TODO item?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Michael Glaesemann wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> 
> On Aug 8, 2007, at 12:18 , Decibel! wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 12:03:34PM -0500, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
> >> Personally, I think expandarray is more appropriate and its
> >> functionality probably more generally useful, as it identifies the
> >> array indices as well. Note you can also rename the columns.
> >
> > Sure. My point is that we should have a way to convert arrays to sets
> > and back in the backend.
> 
> Can't really argue with you there, as I find array_accum myself.  
> (Though I'd still nit-pick that this isn't an array to set  
> conversion, but rather array to--possibly single-column--table.)
> 
> Michael Glaesemann
> grzm seespotcode net
> 
> 
-- End of PGP section, PGP failed!

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>          http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://www.enterprisedb.com
 + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +