Re: Naming of new tsvector functions

From: Stas Kelvich <s(dot)kelvich(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Naming of new tsvector functions
Date: 2016-05-04 16:25:52
Message-ID: 2AF3687B-2B6B-415C-978E-0991EFE9718B@postgrespro.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 04 May 2016, at 16:58, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Stas Kelvich <s(dot)kelvich(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> writes:
>>> On 03 May 2016, at 00:59, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> wrote:
>>> I suspect that steering that ship would be a good idea starting with
>>> deprecation of the old name in 9.6, etc. hs_filter(), perhaps?
>
>> In 9.5 there already were tsvector functions length(), numnode(), strip()
>
>> Recent commit added setweight(), delete(), unnest(), tsvector_to_array(), array_to_tsvector(), filter().
>
>> Last bunch can be painlessly renamed, for example to ts_setweight, ts_delete, ts_unnest, ts_filter.
>
>> The question is what to do with old ones? Leave them as is? Rename to ts_* and create aliases with deprecation warning?
>
> The other ones are not so problematic because they do not conflict with
> SQL keywords. It's only delete() and filter() that scare me.
>
> regards, tom lane

Okay, so changed functions to ts_setweight, ts_delete, ts_unnest, ts_filter.

Attachment Content-Type Size
tsvector_ops_rename.diff application/octet-stream 27.7 KB
unknown_filename text/plain 95 bytes

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2016-05-04 16:28:53 Re: what to revert
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2016-05-04 15:35:58 Re: pg_dump broken for non-super user