Re: Closing some 8.4 open items

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Closing some 8.4 open items
Дата
Msg-id 24514.1239230657@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Closing some 8.4 open items  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Ответы Re: Closing some 8.4 open items  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> Here is my thinking, and considering that that would basically involve a 
> forward-looking design decision right now, I would support dropping the 
> cardinality() function from 8.4 (if people agree that this is in fact the 
> design decision to make).

At this point I'd support that too.  It doesn't seem that getting
cardinality() into 8.4 is important enough to risk making a decision
that we'd regret later.  And I think it's not hard to make the case
that we might regret either of the other choices later, depending on
where we go with arrays.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Closing some 8.4 open items
Следующее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: default parameters for built-in functions