From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Emre Hasegeli <emre(at)hasegeli(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Contains and is contained by operators of inet datatypes |
Date: | 2016-11-22 02:52:27 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYsa-fPBgkn8HVdnkVufRiguUUgpDNazZW8JMT3a6AAYg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 7:57 AM, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> wrote:
> I like the patch because it means less operators to remember for me as a
> PostgreSQL user. And at least for me inet is a rarely used type compared to
> hstore, json and range types which all use @> and <@.
I agree that it would be nice to make the choice of operator names
more consistent. I don't know if doing so will please more or fewer
people than it annoys. I do not like this bit from the original post:
EH> The patch removes the recently committed SP-GiST index support for the
EH> existing operator symbols to give move reason to the users to use the
EH> new symbols.
That seems like the rough equivalent of throwing a wrench into the
datacenter's backup generator to "encourage" them to maintain two
separate and independent backup generators. If we're going to add the
more-standard operator names as synonyms for the existing operator
names, let's do precisely that and no more.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2016-11-22 02:54:27 | Re: [sqlsmith] Failed assertion in parallel worker in ExecInitSubPlan |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-11-22 02:47:02 | Re: Remove the comment on the countereffectiveness of large shared_buffers on Windows |