Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Dmitry Dolgov
Тема Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting
Дата
Msg-id CA+q6zcUn+9OnuMh3Mvu=XaNpSmLGo2HrYcowgJqCDrhKifaz+A@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting  (Arthur Zakirov <a.zakirov@postgrespro.ru>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
> On 16 November 2017 at 12:40, Arthur Zakirov <a.zakirov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>
> Actually it is not only way to return isnull information.

What i've meant is that it's the only way if we want to keep the function
signature. Actually I would prefer this

    (container, internal) -> extracted value

over this (I assume that's exactly what you've suggested?)

    (container, internal, internal) -> extracted value

because it makes the purpose of the function more clear (especially for custom
data types). Also it would be consistent with `assign` functions (since
`isnull` is not assigned there). But I see your point, a separate argument for
`isnull` will make it more straightforward in terms of null handling.

> fetch() functions also doesn't need in ExprEvalStep struct

I had hard time parsing this, but from your examples I assume you're talking
about passing little bit different arguments to `fetch` function (am I right?).
Just from functionality point of view I don't see a big difference in what
argument to use to return `isnull` by reference. So at the end I think we need
to choose between having one or two `internal` arguments for `fetch` functions.
Any other opinions?

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Magnus Hagander
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Schedule for migration to pglister
Следующее
От: Jeff Janes
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: bgwriter_lru_maxpages range in postgresql.conf