From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Some array semantics issues |
Date: | 2005-11-16 21:03:15 |
Message-ID: | 10797.1132174995@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> Well, in that case what do you think about
>> {{1,2},{3,4},{5,6},{7,8}}
>> vs
>> {{1,2,3,4},{5,6,7,8}}
> In the first case the first element is {1,2} and in the second case the first
> element is {1,2,3,4} so from my point of view there's no way these are the
> same.
Well, then I think we're converging on agreement that array comparison
should always take into account the number of dimensions and the axis
lengths. What seems still in question is whether to compare or ignore
the axis lower bounds.
I'd argue that ordinary equality should include the lower bounds, but
I'm willing to provide a separate operator (or whole btree opclass
if people want it) that ignores the lower bounds. We just need a name.
Maybe ~=, ~<, etc?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Fetter | 2005-11-16 21:08:05 | Re: Some array semantics issues |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2005-11-16 20:50:29 | Re: Some array semantics issues |