On lör, 2010-07-24 at 20:32 +0100, Mike Fowler wrote:
Attached is the revised version of the patch addressing all the
issues
raised in the review, except for the use of AexprConst and c_expr.
With
my limited knowledge of bison I've failed to resolve the shift/reduce
errors that are
On 21/07/10 08:33, Mike Fowler wrote:
Why is the first argument AexprConst instead of a_expr? The SQL
standard says it's a character string literal, but I think we can very
well allow arbitrary expressions.
Yes, it was AexprConst because of the specification. I also found that
using it solved
Hi Peter,
Thanks for your feedback.
On 20/07/10 19:54, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Attached is a patch with the revised XMLEXISTS function, complete with
grammar support and regression tests. The implemented grammar is:
XMLEXISTS ( xpath_expression PASSING BY REF xml_value [BY REF] )
Though the
On tis, 2010-06-29 at 12:22 +0100, Mike Fowler wrote:
Mike Fowler wrote:
Thanks again for your help Robert, turns out the fault was in the
pg_proc entry (the 3 up there should've been a two!). Once I took the
grammar out it was quickly obvious where I'd gone wrong.
Attached is a
Mike Fowler wrote:
Thanks again for your help Robert, turns out the fault was in the
pg_proc entry (the 3 up there should've been a two!). Once I took the
grammar out it was quickly obvious where I'd gone wrong.
Attached is a patch with the revised XMLEXISTS function, complete with
grammar
and finally in pg_proc.h I have:
DATA(insert OID = 3037 ( xmlexists PGNSP PGUID 12 1 0 0 f f f t f i 3 0
16 25 142 _null_ _null_ _null_ _null_ xml_exists _null_ _null_ _null_ ));
DESCR(evaluate XPath expression in a boolean context);
It looks like the pg_proc entry is creating an
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Mike Fowler m...@mlfowler.com wrote:
Thanks again for your help Robert, turns out the fault was in the pg_proc
entry (the 3 up there should've been a two!). Once I took the grammar out it
was quickly obvious where I'd gone wrong.
Glad it was a helpful
Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Mike Fowler m...@mlfowler.com wrote:
Thanks again for your help Robert, turns out the fault was in the pg_proc
entry (the 3 up there should've been a two!). Once I took the grammar out it
was quickly obvious where I'd gone wrong.
