From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: patch: bytea_agg |
Date: | 2012-04-11 17:46:55 |
Message-ID: | 1334166415.25392.14.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On lör, 2012-04-07 at 10:38 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Nevertheless, the problem would now be that adding string_agg(bytea)
> > would effectively forbid adding string_agg(bytea, delim) in the
> future.
> > So making a two-argument string_agg(bytea, bytea) now seems like the
> > best solution anyway. (This applies independently of the function
> > renaming, actually.)
>
> Hm. So are you now suggesting we should get rid of one-argument
> bytea_agg and replace it with two-argument string_agg(bytea,bytea)?
> I could support that, since we've not released bytea_agg yet.
Yes, that looks like the best solution. Here is a patch for that.
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
bytea-string-agg.patch | text/x-patch | 7.4 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-04-11 17:57:13 | Re: patch: bytea_agg |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2012-04-11 17:40:10 | Re: Last gasp |