On Feb 12, 2013, at 8:00 PM, Merlin Moncure <mmonc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> +1 for removing that where possible. We generally have avoided such >> names at SQL level. (The C-level function names need such prefixes to >> be unique, but the SQL names don't.) >> >> In the cases where one or more arguments are anyelement, however, we may >> need to be more specific to avoid ambiguity problems in future. I agree >> with Josh's objections to record(), row() etc. to_record() and >> to_recordset() might be OK. Agreed on all counts. (Wow!) > ! Not sure this would make a useful operator. Maybe for exists()? :-O David -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
