Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On fre, 2010-11-12 at 09:44 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> But I'm still not convinced that this feature is useful enough to
>> justify the implementation effort. AFAICS there's nothing here that
>> you couldn't get with some non-default operators on regular arrays,
> Uniqu
On fre, 2010-11-12 at 09:44 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> But I'm still not convinced that this feature is useful enough to
> justify the implementation effort. AFAICS there's nothing here that
> you couldn't get with some non-default operators on regular arrays,
Unique constraints would behave differ
David Fetter writes:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 10:13:40AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Itagaki Takahiro writes:
>>> Another issue for sorting is that we have 4 kinds of sorting: ASC/DESC
>>> and NULLS FIRST/LAST.
>> We have a lot more kinds than that. See USING.
> USING pretty much gives us no ch
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 10:13:40AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Itagaki Takahiro writes:
> > Another issue for sorting is that we have 4 kinds of sorting: ASC/DESC
> > and NULLS FIRST/LAST.
>
> We have a lot more kinds than that. See USING.
USING pretty much gives us no chance of optimizing at all.
Itagaki Takahiro writes:
> Another issue for sorting is that we have 4 kinds of sorting: ASC/DESC
> and NULLS FIRST/LAST.
We have a lot more kinds than that. See USING.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make chan
On Monday 15 November 2010 09:47:15 Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 14:37, Pavel Stehule
wrote:
> > Maybe can be useful to implement a searching on sorted array.
> > You can hold a flag if multiset is sorted or not.
>
> Are you suggesting to add an IS_SORTED bit to for each Arr
2010/11/15 Itagaki Takahiro :
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 14:37, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> Maybe can be useful to implement a searching on sorted array.
>> You can hold a flag if multiset is sorted or not.
>
> Are you suggesting to add an IS_SORTED bit to for each ArrayType value?
> It might be possib
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 14:37, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Maybe can be useful to implement a searching on sorted array.
> You can hold a flag if multiset is sorted or not.
Are you suggesting to add an IS_SORTED bit to for each ArrayType value?
It might be possible, but I'm not sure how much it is use
Hello
2010/11/15 Itagaki Takahiro :
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 00:02, Itagaki Takahiro
> wrote:
>> Postgres supports ARRAY data types well, but there are some
>> more array functions in the SQL standard. Also, the standard
>> has MULTISET data type, that is an unordered array.
>
> Here is a WIP pa
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 00:02, Itagaki Takahiro
wrote:
> Postgres supports ARRAY data types well, but there are some
> more array functions in the SQL standard. Also, the standard
> has MULTISET data type, that is an unordered array.
Here is a WIP patch for multiset function supports. Note that m
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:53:09AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Robert Haas writes:
> >> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Itagaki Takahiro
> >> wrote:
> >>> If we reuse type IDs of arrays for multisets, the multisets would
> >>> have some spe
Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The problem is not with the type system: as long as you give multisets
>> different type OIDs from arrays, everything will work fine.
> And thus you must create a THIRD copy of every entry in pg_type. That
> doesn't qual
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Itagaki Takahiro
>> wrote:
>>> If we reuse type IDs of arrays for multisets, the multisets would
>>> have some special typmod. For example, typmod = 0 means multiset,
>>> and positive val
Robert Haas writes:
> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Itagaki Takahiro
> wrote:
>> If we reuse type IDs of arrays for multisets, the multisets would
>> have some special typmod. For example, typmod = 0 means multiset,
>> and positive value means array with max cardinality. Note that
>> the SQL
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Itagaki Takahiro
wrote:
> If we reuse type IDs of arrays for multisets, the multisets would
> have some special typmod. For example, typmod = 0 means multiset,
> and positive value means array with max cardinality. Note that
> the SQL standard doesn't mention abou
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 06:06, Darren Duncan wrote:
> This is one place that SQL made things more complicated than they needed to
> be. Multisets have generally the same structure *and* operators (union,
> etc) as tables, but they use different syntax for each. A better design
> would be to make
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 03:05, Tom Lane wrote:
> "David E. Wheeler" writes:
>> So are you planning to implement multisets? It's a feature I'd love to see
>
> What actual functionality does it buy? AFAICT from Itagaki-san's
> description, it's an array only you ignore the specific element order.
Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 3:42 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Nov 11, 2010, at 12:08 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
That sounds like a composite type to me.
No, it's "perpendicular" in the sense that while a composite type allows
you to have different columns, this multiset th
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 3:42 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Nov 11, 2010, at 12:08 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
>>> That sounds like a composite type to me.
>>
>> No, it's "perpendicular" in the sense that while a composite type allows
>> you to have different columns, this multiset thing lets yo
On Nov 11, 2010, at 12:08 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> That sounds like a composite type to me.
>
> No, it's "perpendicular" in the sense that while a composite type allows
> you to have different columns, this multiset thing lets you have "rows"
> (I initially thought about them as sets of scala
Excerpts from David E. Wheeler's message of jue nov 11 15:45:55 -0300 2010:
> On Nov 11, 2010, at 10:19 AM, Darren Duncan wrote:
>
> > I think that it would be best to implement MULTISET in the same way that a
> > TABLE is implemented. Logically and structurally they are the same thing,
> > but
On Nov 11, 2010, at 10:24 AM, Nicolas Barbier wrote:
>> Also, no dupes.
>
> The "multi" in multiset indicates that duplicate elements are
> explicitly allowed and tracked.
D'oh! Right.
D
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscriptio
On Nov 11, 2010, at 10:19 AM, Darren Duncan wrote:
> I think that it would be best to implement MULTISET in the same way that a
> TABLE is implemented. Logically and structurally they are the same thing, but
> that a MULTISET typically is used as a field value of a table row. Aka, a
> table an
2010/11/11 David E. Wheeler :
> On Nov 11, 2010, at 10:05 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>>> So are you planning to implement multisets? It's a feature I'd love to see
>>
>> What actual functionality does it buy? AFAICT from Itagaki-san's
>> description, it's an array only you ignore the specific element
I think that it would be best to implement MULTISET in the same way that a TABLE
is implemented. Logically and structurally they are the same thing, but that a
MULTISET typically is used as a field value of a table row. Aka, a table and a
multiset are just different names for a relation, loose
On Nov 11, 2010, at 10:05 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> So are you planning to implement multisets? It's a feature I'd love to see
>
> What actual functionality does it buy? AFAICT from Itagaki-san's
> description, it's an array only you ignore the specific element order.
> So what? You can write func
"David E. Wheeler" writes:
> So are you planning to implement multisets? It's a feature I'd love to see
What actual functionality does it buy? AFAICT from Itagaki-san's
description, it's an array only you ignore the specific element order.
So what? You can write functions that work that way now
On Nov 11, 2010, at 7:02 AM, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
> MULTISET supports are more difficult. We have corresponding
> type IDs for each array, but we might not want to add additional
> IDs for multiset for each type. Any ideas for the issue?
Why not?
> If we reuse type IDs of arrays for multisets
28 matches
Mail list logo
