| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Yugo Nagata <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Subject: | Re: Hash Functions |
| Date: | 2017-09-01 02:55:01 |
| Message-ID: | 21187.1504234501@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I think this takes care of adding not only the infrastructure but
> support for all the core data types, but I'm not quite sure how to
> handle upgrading types in contrib. It looks like citext, hstore, and
> several data types provided by isn have hash opclasses, and I think
> that there's no syntax for adding a support function to an existing
> opclass. We could add that, but I'm not sure how safe it would be.
ALTER OPERATOR FAMILY ADD FUNCTION ... ?
That would result in the functions being considered "loose" in the
family rather than bound into an operator class. I think that's
actually the right thing, because they shouldn't be considered
to be required.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-09-01 03:03:13 | Re: Hash Functions |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-09-01 02:31:25 | Re: Hash Functions |