Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3529.1365048675@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL) (Brendan Jurd <direvus@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re:
Should array_length() Return NULL)
Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Brendan Jurd <direvus@gmail.com> writes: > My thought was that on-disk zero-D arrays should be converted into > empty 1-D arrays (with default lower bounds of course) when they are > read by array_recv. Huh? array_recv would not get applied to datums coming off of disk. The only way to make this 100% transparent would be to go through every C-coded function that deals with arrays and make sure it delivers identical results for both cases. It's possible we could do that for array functions in the core code, but what about user-written extensions? In any case, the whole exercise is pointless if we don't change the visible behavior of array_dims et al. So I think the idea that this would be without visible consequence is silly. What's up for argument is just how much incompatibility is acceptable. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: