| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Mike Blackwell <mike(dot)blackwell(at)rrd(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruno Harbulot <bruno(at)distributedmatter(dot)net>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Problems with question marks in operators (JDBC, ECPG, ...) |
| Date: | 2015-05-19 19:13:01 |
| Message-ID: | 555B8B3D.4030204@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 05/19/2015 02:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Mike Blackwell <mike(dot)blackwell(at)rrd(dot)com> writes:
>> See for example
>> http://docs.oracle.com/cd/B19306_01/text.102/b14218/cqoper.htm#i997330,
>> Table 3-1, third row, showing the precedence of '?'. Further down the
>> page, under "Fuzzy" see "Backward Compatibility Syntax".
> If I'm reading that right, that isn't a SQL-level operator but an operator
> in their text search query language, which would only appear in SQL
> queries within string literals (compare tsquery's query operators in PG).
> So it wouldn't be a hazard for ?-substitution, as long as the substituter
> was bright enough to not change string literals.
>
>
Yeah. What would be nice would be to have a functional notation
corresponding to the operators, so you would be able to write
something."?>"(a,b)
and it would mean exactly the same thing, including indexability, as
a ?> b
I presume that wouldn't give the drivers a headache.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruno Harbulot | 2015-05-19 19:15:17 | Re: Problems with question marks in operators (JDBC, ECPG, ...) |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2015-05-19 19:11:33 | Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE with _any_ constraint |