> > > > Well, they aren't separate fields so you can't ORDER BY domain. The dot
> > > > was used so it looks like a schema based on dbname.
>
> IMHO it should look like an user in domain ;)
Agreed, but there is something to be said for doing a sort of users
per domain. This wouldn't be an issue, I don't think, if there was a
split_before() and split_after() like functions.
# SELECT split_before('[EMAIL PROTECTED]','@'), split_after('[EMAIL PROTECTED]', '@');
?column? | ?column?
----------+------------
user | domain.com
What would you guys say to submissions for a patch that would add the
function listed above? Maybe just a function called get_user(text)
and get_domain(text)? ::shrug:: Just some thoughts since there is
validity to being able to parse/operate on this data efficiently. If
those functions existed, then I think everyone would be able to have
their pie as they want it. -sc
--
Sean Chittenden
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
