On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takah...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 02:34, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> I'm in favor of rejecting this patch in its entirety. The >>>> functionality looks useful, but once you remove the syntax support, it >>>> could just as easily be distributed as a contrib module rather than in >>>> core. >>> >>> +1 ... if we're going to provide nonstandard behavior, it should be with >>> a different syntax. Also, with a contrib module we could keep on >>> providing the nonstandard behavior for people who still need it, even >>> after implementing the standard properly. >> >> Good point. > > I agree for collect() function, that is the only function we cannot > provide compatibility when we have MULTISET. But others are still > reasonable because they won't provide nonstandard behavior. > > The SQL standard seems to have abstract COLLECTION data type as a > super class of ARRAY and MULTISET. So, it's reasonable that > functions and operators that accept MULTISETs also accept ARRAYs. > For example, we will have cardinality(ARRAY) even if we have > cardinality(MULTISET). Also, trim_array() is in the SQL standard. > > I can remove some parts in the patch, especially for parser changes, > but others should be still in the core.
Well, do you want to revise this and submit a stripped-down version? I'm not averse to adding things that are required by the standard and won't cause backward compatibility problems later. The documentation for trim_array() in the current patch version is pretty terrible. The documentation describes it -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
