Re: Using Expanded Objects other than Arrays from plpgsql
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Using Expanded Objects other than Arrays from plpgsql |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 647219.1736019347@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Using Expanded Objects other than Arrays from plpgsql (Michel Pelletier <pelletier.michel@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Using Expanded Objects other than Arrays from plpgsql
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Michel Pelletier <pelletier.michel@gmail.com> writes: > I've circled back on this task to do some work improving the skeleton code, > but going back through our thread I landed on this point Tom made about > usefulness vs pure skeleton and my natural desire is to make a simple > expanded object that is also useful, so I brainstormed a bit and decided to > try something relatively simple but also (IMO) quite useful, an expanded > datum that wraps sqlite's serialize/derserialize API: > https://github.com/michelp/postgres-sqlite I think the odds that we'd accept a module with a dependency on sqlite are negligible. It's too big of a build dependency for too little return. Also, I'm sure that a module defined like that would be a pretty poor example/starting point for other expanded-object applications: there'd be too many aspects that have only to do with interfacing to sqlite, making it hard to see the expanded-object forest for the sqlite trees. I have to admit though that the forest-v-trees aspect makes it fairly hard to think of any suitable example module that would serve much real-world purpose. Likely scenarios for expanded objects just have a lot of functionality in them. For instance, I thought for a moment of suggesting that teaching contrib/hstore to work with expanded representations of hstores could be useful. But I'd forgotten how much functionality that type has. It'd be a big project and would still have a lot of baggage. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: