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

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arthur Zakirov <a.zakirov@postgrespro.ru>
To: Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Cc: peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Generic type subscripting
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 16:24:33 +0300
Message-ID: <77f6449a-cc91-fee2-697f-5eacebfca0d7@postgrespro.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f65bee8c-34b8-178c-2ff2-28b2cfb7de4f@postgrespro.ru>
References: <CA+q6zcVovR+XY4mfk-7oNk-rF91gH0PebnNfuUjuuDsyHjOcVA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20423.1489533013@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<393cd0ae-5b84-849e-fc73-7077470a009e@pgmasters.net>
	<CA+q6zcUX=Om75kgZXkpYPhnwUCo4osFpzd83dKPzjSGfCmxEgA@mail.gmail.com>
	<65df4a65-a9d8-3531-5baf-edb237771f0e@pgmasters.net>
	<22355.1490369372@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<449f42b9-f338-9e45-cb33-3e15c7b547ad@postgrespro.ru>
	<CA+q6zcWFLpEX6H1LOOKFJMAN+LB+mmEx=6Syd4WVioXkbXq32A@mail.gmail.com>
	<c7cc0592-4c9b-699d-3b61-810804759de6@postgrespro.ru>
	<CA+q6zcXQ9UO0_qGqoFgd_4ymKYxwr-3he+abEbnWaPk2nbmPVQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+q6zcXsonX+qLhf2crQgj14NzJmcibABhyVch1kjNtSL1+V1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKNkYnzpMwx0KtLCaOoFVGQZoJHJ5E+mTrZGEcary0eKu2LdLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+q6zcWVDF5Y8+FNQoV1vOmA9zCt4TiCqpHmDP3grP6v2mE30A@mail.gmail.com>
	<f65bee8c-34b8-178c-2ff2-28b2cfb7de4f@postgrespro.ru>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>

On 05.04.2017 16:06, Arthur Zakirov wrote:
>
> I'd like to focus on "refevalfunc" and "refnestedfunc" fields as I did
> earlier. I think using Oid type for them is a bad approach. "..._fetch"
> and "..._assign" functions in catalog is unnecessary movement to me.
> User of subscript of his type may think the same. But he won't see the
> code and won't know why he needs these functions.
>
> And so "..._fetch" and "..._assign" functions in catalog is a bad design
> to me. But, of course, it is just my opinion. This approach is the main
> think which we should resolve first, because after commiting the patch
> it will be hard to fix it.
>

I've read olders messages and thread. I see now that this approach was 
made with other hackers. I've just been confused when I've been 
implementing subscript for ltree.

Sorry if I confused you.

Any opinions about the patch?

-- 
Arthur Zakirov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
Russian Postgres Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers



view thread (276+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <77f6449a-cc91-fee2-697f-5eacebfca0d7@postgrespro.ru>
Permalink:  ../77f6449a-cc91-fee2-697f-5eacebfca0d7@postgrespro.ru/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/77f6449a-cc91-fee2-697f-5eacebfca0d7@postgrespro.ru

 · 

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: a.zakirov@postgrespro.ru, 9erthalion6@gmail.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, david@pgmasters.net
  Subject: Re: [PATCH] Generic type subscripting
  In-Reply-To: <77f6449a-cc91-fee2-697f-5eacebfca0d7@postgrespro.ru>

* 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