Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL)
От | David E. Wheeler |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | B928A8E6-82CF-4CAD-BC2D-6CD06326E92B@justatheory.com 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)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Jun 11, 2013, at 3:09 PM, Brendan Jurd <direvus@gmail.com> wrote: > There have been attempts to add a cardinality function in the past, as > it is required by the SQL spec, but these attempts have stalled when > trying to decide how it should handle multidim arrays. Having it > return the length of the first dimension is the more spec-compatible > way to go, but some folks argued that it should work as > ArrayGetNItems, because we don't already have a function for that at > the SQL level. Therefore I propose we add cardinality() per the spec, > and another function to expose ArrayGetNItems. > > And that's about where we got to, when the whole discussion was put on > a time-out to make room for the beta. > > I am withdrawing the original zero-D patch in favour of the proposed > new functions. If you have an opinion about that, please do chime in. > Depending on how that goes I may post a patch implementing my new > proposal in the next few days. +1 to this proposal. Modulo function names, perhaps. I don’t much care what they're called, as long as the work as you describehere. Best, David Array Complainer
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: