Re: pgsql: Declare assorted array functions using anycompatible not anyelem

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Declare assorted array functions using anycompatible not anyelem
Date: 2020-11-09 22:15:49
Message-ID: 2001798.1604960149@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On 11/9/20 4:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think probably the right fix is just to change that test case to
>> use a different implementation function, per [1]. I'm holding off
>> pushing the fix till after this week's wraps, though.

> I'd be ok with that. Can we devise a fix that will work all the way back
> to 9.2, which is where we start upgrade testing?

Hm. To fix it this way, we'd have to push the test-script change
into the pre-9.5 branches. There's no technical reason we can't do
that, I don't think, though it's a bit outside our normal practices.

>> If I thought that user-defined aggregates relying on array_cat were
>> really a thing (and not just a test case), I'd be more concerned about
>> this. But it's hard to see why users shouldn't use array_agg() instead
>> of rolling their own.

> Possibly something that's been migrated from before we had array_agg.

array_agg goes back to 8.4, and for at least most of that time it's
been very much more efficient than anything based on array_cat. So I
think it's past time to push any such laggards into the 21st century.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-11-09 22:25:13 pgsql: Stamp 13.1.
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2020-11-09 22:00:05 Re: pgsql: Declare assorted array functions using anycompatible not anyelem