Re: general purpose array_sort
| От | David G. Johnston |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: general purpose array_sort |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAKFQuwZQMxp5WL2FYTogvH2vhpE2eaqY_nCJQAzarNd_zzJnwg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: general purpose array_sort (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: general purpose array_sort
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 9:06 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
This business with a textual representation of a sort clause seems like
over-engineering ... except that it's also under-engineered, because
the parsing is lame and incomplete. (No USING option, and the fact
that collation comes from somewhere else seems impossibly confusing.)
Let's drop that.
I can accept this outcome though an optional three-valued boolean sort order (ascending and descending only) I'd argue is worth keeping. null value placement too I guess, three-valued boolean (nulls_first).
David J.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: