> On 04 May 2016, at 16:58, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Stas Kelvich <s.kelv...@postgrespro.ru> writes: >>> On 03 May 2016, at 00:59, David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> wrote: >>> I suspect that steering that ship would be a good idea starting with >>> deprecation of the old name in 9.6, etc. hs_filter(), perhaps? > >> In 9.5 there already were tsvector functions length(), numnode(), strip() > >> Recent commit added setweight(), delete(), unnest(), tsvector_to_array(), >> array_to_tsvector(), filter(). > >> Last bunch can be painlessly renamed, for example to ts_setweight, >> ts_delete, ts_unnest, ts_filter. > >> The question is what to do with old ones? Leave them as is? Rename to ts_* >> and create aliases with deprecation warning? > > The other ones are not so problematic because they do not conflict with > SQL keywords. It's only delete() and filter() that scare me. > > regards, tom lane
Okay, so changed functions to ts_setweight, ts_delete, ts_unnest, ts_filter.
tsvector_ops_rename.diff
Description: Binary data
-- Stas Kelvich Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com Russian Postgres Company
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
