Re: xpath processing brain dead

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Nikolay Samokhvalov <samokhvalov(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: xpath processing brain dead
Date: 2009-03-01 15:13:10
Message-ID: 49AAA606.6070200@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hannu Krosing wrote:
>> Some of the functions, including some specified in the standard, produce
>> fragments. That's why we have the 'IS DOCUMENT' test.
>>
>
> But then you could use xmlfragments as the functions return type, no ?
>
> Does tha standard require that the same field type must store both
> documents and fragments ?
>
>

Yes, the standard very explicitly provides for one XML type which need
not be an XML document. We have no choice about that.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2009-03-01 15:30:46 Re: cardinality()
Previous Message Grzegorz Jaskiewicz 2009-03-01 11:22:44 Re: cardinality()