Re: HASHes [was Re: Calling PL functions with named parameters]

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: HASHes [was Re: Calling PL functions with named parameters]
Date: 2004-08-16 16:07:13
Message-ID: 14313.1092672433@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> What about making HASHes a first-class object?

I see less than zero value in this. You'd have to serialize the
contents to ship it to the client anyway, so there is no particular
point in inventing a random new representation for "row".

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2004-08-16 16:09:31 Re: pg_subtrans and WAL
Previous Message David Fetter 2004-08-16 16:01:03 HASHes [was Re: Calling PL functions with named parameters]