Re: So what's an "empty" array anyway?
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: So what's an "empty" array anyway? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 28521.1224613401@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: So what's an "empty" array anyway? ("Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: So what's an "empty" array anyway?
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure@gmail.com> writes:
> ISTM this is the way it should work from SQL level:
> '{}'::int[] empty 1d
> '{{},{}}'::int[] :: empty 2d
The first one looks okay, but ISTM the second one is not describing
an "empty" array: the upper dimension is of length 2. In particular
I think that under your proposal array_dims() would probably yield
these results:
[1:0][1:2][1:0]
and all of these would be different:
'{{}}'::int[] [1:1][1:0]
'{{},{}}'::int[] [1:2][1:0]
'{{},{},{}}'::int[] [1:3][1:0]
Maybe this is okay but it feels a bit weird.
> If you dump zero dimension arrays, then the problem about what to do
> with array_dims goes away.
I'm not against dropping zero-dimension arrays ...
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: