hstore ==> and deprecate =>
in [PgSql]
|
From: "David E. Wheeler" on 16 Jun 2010 19:37 On Jun 16, 2010, at 4:24 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> Put me down for +>. > > Since there are no other votes for that option (or, indeed, any other > option), I'm going to go with my original instinct and change hstore > => text[] to hstore & text[]. Patch to do that is attached. Damn. My other argument is that & looks like boolean or bitwise AND, so the return of an hstore might be unexpected. +> looks more like an arrow (sort of). But it doesn't much matter, as long as it works. Best, David -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Tom Lane on 16 Jun 2010 19:53 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(a)gmail.com> writes: > Since there are no other votes for that option (or, indeed, any other > option), I'm going to go with my original instinct and change hstore > => text[] to hstore & text[]. Patch to do that is attached. Um ... wait a minute. What happened to backwards compatibility? I thought the idea was to deprecate => for a release or so, not kill it on the spot. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: "David E. Wheeler" on 16 Jun 2010 19:54 On Jun 16, 2010, at 4:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Um ... wait a minute. What happened to backwards compatibility? > I thought the idea was to deprecate => for a release or so, not kill it > on the spot. hstore => text[] is new in 9.0. David -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Josh Berkus on 17 Jun 2010 16:39 > Since there are no other votes for that option (or, indeed, any other > option), I'm going to go with my original instinct and change hstore > => text[] to hstore & text[]. Patch to do that is attached. If what that operator is doing is appending an array of text to an Hstore, shouldn't we use || instead? -- -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://www.pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Robert Haas on 17 Jun 2010 16:40
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 4:39 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(a)agliodbs.com> wrote: > >> Since there are no other votes for that option (or, indeed, any other >> option), I'm going to go with my original instinct and change hstore >> => text[] to hstore & text[]. �Patch to do that is attached. > > If what that operator is doing is appending an array of text to an > Hstore, shouldn't we use || instead? It isn't. || already does what you're saying. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers |