On Aug 8, 2007, at 12:18 , Decibel! wrote:
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 12:03:34PM -0500, Michael Glaesemann wrote:Personally, I think expandarray is more appropriate and its functionality probably more generally useful, as it identifies the array indices as well. Note you can also rename the columns.Sure. My point is that we should have a way to convert arrays to sets and back in the backend.
Can't really argue with you there, as I find array_accum myself. (Though I'd still nit-pick that this isn't an array to set conversion, but rather array to--possibly single-column--table.)
Michael Glaesemann grzm seespotcode net
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
