Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9F514763D3; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 03:39:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from matrix.gatewaynet.com (unknown [217.19.69.50]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A5394763A3; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 03:39:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (achill@localhost) by matrix.gatewaynet.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g917nfa00671; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 10:49:41 +0300 Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 10:49:41 +0300 (EEST) From: Achilleus Mantzios To: Tom Lane Cc: Mike Sosteric , Bruno Wolff III , , Subject: Re: [SQL] arrays In-Reply-To: <21137.1033396928@sss.pgh.pa.us> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200210/4 X-Sequence-Number: 31003 I was wondering why is such a rage against arrays. I posted 2 very common problems where arrays provide the only natural (and efficient) fit. (and got no responses) So it seems to me that: - Arrays implementation (along with the intarray package) in postgresql is well performing and stable. - Some problems shout out for array usage. - The Array interface is defined in java.sql package. (I dont know if sql arrays is in some standard but it seems that Java sees it that way, at least). - The Array interface is implemented in the official postgresql java package. - In some problems replacing arrays according the tradition relational paradigm would end up in a such a performance degradation, that some applications would be unusable. - Oleg and Teodor did a great job in intarray, making array usage easy and efficient. Thanx! ================================================================== Achilleus Mantzios S/W Engineer IT dept Dynacom Tankers Mngmt Nikis 4, Glyfada Athens 16610 Greece tel: +30-10-8981112 fax: +30-10-8981877 email: achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com mantzios@softlab.ece.ntua.gr