pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Cc: Arthur Zakirov <a.zakirov@postgrespro.ru>
Cc: Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 13:37:05 -0500
Message-ID: <10983.1515695825@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+Tgmobvw+V3yG4LH3VzmR=9ais8fWFgeym1kYpZbjGLDzA3ig@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+q6zcUws7270pFKgT7G0jFuLxmCaBLqPL0o4sfgfLnRBGg9gg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20171116114016.GA21162@zakirov.localdomain>
	<CA+q6zcUn+9OnuMh3Mvu=XaNpSmLGo2HrYcowgJqCDrhKifaz+A@mail.gmail.com>
	<20171119151350.GA23853@arthur.localdomain>
	<CA+q6zcXff34m4EskCiWdvc2BTx2J++w5gwSb43X0ejgg+sj9Wg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAB7nPqSQFonLWsVr1OuDDd7NBHOBMNiHdvRwhxpkNV2W9-QUgg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+q6zcW52cJ-T3xrGm5BJ8ET6bcc0n3OYhM_oA9AQxAMZR2Otg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+q6zcX7W56i-k-_KK51ZQA3GZZKsFx0KzGAGm2rtC8M7948kQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<8809.1515031526@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+q6zcVuBkjWWYixH8ERPkaQiA9daAYmHTSRn=jn_Ajrzp1=Ug@mail.gmail.com>
	<20180108232959.s2ipp7tjcvlaixcs@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<846.1515629363@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+TgmoZ+eZ+RYUCr5cyoBzwXMDLZWTO264PGE81bNwwe5_WNGw@mail.gmail.com>
	<10021.1515694533@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+Tgmobvw+V3yG4LH3VzmR=9ais8fWFgeym1kYpZbjGLDzA3ig@mail.gmail.com>

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:15 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I think you missed the point.  The question is whether the existence of a
>> subscripting function means that we need to treat the subscriptable type
>> as physically containing the subscript result type.

> I don't think I missed the point at all -- this is the exact same set
> of issues that arise with respect to functions.  Indeed, I gave an
> example of a function that needs to be updated if a column of the
> input type is altered.  In the case of functions, we've decided that
> it's not our problem.

Right, but in the case of stored arrays, we've decided that it *is*
our problem (as indeed it must be, because the user has no tools with
which they could fix a representation change for stored data).  The
question is to what extent that need would propagate to pseudo array
types.

> In other words, we're vigorously agreeing.

I think we're agreed on what should be in the v1 version of the patch.
I'm not 100% convinced that the problem won't come up eventually.

			regards, tom lane




view thread (276+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <10983.1515695825@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../10983.1515695825@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/10983.1515695825@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, robertmhaas@gmail.com, andres@anarazel.de, 9erthalion6@gmail.com, michael.paquier@gmail.com, a.zakirov@postgrespro.ru, obartunov@gmail.com, peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com, david@pgmasters.net
  Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting
  In-Reply-To: <10983.1515695825@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox