On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 08:55:49AM +0100, Dean Rasheed wrote: > On 31 May 2013 08:34, Brendan Jurd <dire...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 31 May 2013 02:52, Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rash...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Testing 9.3beta, it seems that array_remove() may return an empty 1-d > >> array whose upper bound is lower than its lower bound. I know that we > >> discussed allowing this kind of array, but I don't think that > >> discussion reached any conclusion, other than to agree that the > >> current empty 0-d array behaviour would be kept in 9.3. > > > > That's right, zero-D is still the only supported representation of an > > empty array, so when array_remove() yields an empty array it ought to > > be zero-D. Good catch. > > Yeah, that's what I thought. Here's a patch to fix it, plus a new > regression test to confirm that the result is a zero-D array.
Committed. Thanks. -- Noah Misch EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
