Re: Re: logical changeset generation v3 - comparison to Postgres-R change set format
От | Hannu Krosing |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: logical changeset generation v3 - comparison to Postgres-R change set format |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 50F3C6F5.30404@2ndQuadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: logical changeset generation v3 - comparison to Postgres-R change set format (Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/13/2013 08:06 PM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote: > Hannu Krosing <hannu@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: >>> Does this hint that postgreSQL also needs an sameness operator >>> ( "is" or "===" in same languages). >> How do people feel about adding a real sameness operator ? > Well. I would prefer it if we can bypass the need for it. What is actually sufficient for current problem is sameness which compares outputs of type output functions and also considers NULLs to be the same. The reason for not providing equality for xml was not that two xml files which compare equal as text could be considered unequal in any sense but that there are some other textual representations of the same xml which could also be considered to be equal, like different whitespace between tag and attribute > Then Do we need the full range of eq, eql, equal and equalp predicates, > and would all of them allow overriding or just some? I consider sameness as basic thing as IS NULL, so the sameness should not be overridable. Extending IS NOT DISTINCT FROM to do this comparison instead of current '=' seems reasonable. That is SELECT '<tag/>'::xml IS DISTINCT FROM '<tag />'::xml should return TRUE as long as the internal representation of the two differ and even after you add equality operator to xml which compares some canonic form of xml and thus would make SELECT '<tag/>'::xml = '<tag />'::xml ; be TRUE. Regards, Hannu > > http://www.cs.cmu.edu/Groups/AI/html/cltl/clm/node74.html > > Regards,
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: