Re: [mmoncure@gmail.com: Re: [GENERAL] array_to_set functions]

On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 04:08:27PM -0500, Decibel! wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 05:38:33PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > 2007/8/14, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>:
> > >
> > > TODO item?
> > >
> > > + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
> > >
> > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > > TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
> >
> > I am against. It's too simple do it in SQL language.
>
> Why make everyone who works with arrays create a function just to do
> this? Something that's of use to common users should be included, simple
> or not.

As I recall, this wasn't included because it didn't do all of what the
SQL:2003 standard UNNEST does, although looking it over, the only
thing it "doesn't do" is to allow the results to come back in any
order other than the array index's. Sadly, UNNEST would be a new
feature, and we're *way* past that for 8.3 :/

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666
Skype: davidfetter

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to PostgreSQL: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate