SET type (was Re: WAL versus Postgres)
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | SET type (was Re: WAL versus Postgres) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.21.0005152153050.349-100000@localhost.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: SET type (was Re: WAL versus Postgres)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane writes: > I have just been scanning some of the original Postgres papers > (in an unsuccessful search to find out how one uses "set" attributes; > anyone know?) I've been playing around with that a while ago in the hope that this would explain this table-as-datatype thing but several findings led me to believe that this is long dead, removed, rotten code: * SET uses textin/textout * no functions defined with SET arguments or return values, pg_proc.proretset is false for all rows * the only entry point for defining sets is in parser/parser.c, which is fittingly marked #ifdef SETS_FIXED The function SetDefine in utils/adt/sets.c makes me think that a SET is more or less a stored procedure without arguments. That is, you would define some SET type in terms of a query from another table and then you could use predicates like `value in set'. The syntax for this must have gotten lost in the PostQUEL to SQL switch. All in all there's not much to rescue from there, I believe. -- Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115 peter_e@gmx.net 75262 Uppsala http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: