From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Should array_length() Return NULL |
Date: | 2013-03-16 18:50:56 |
Message-ID: | CAFj8pRA7odP+1BwKOQR7P8gRzepuZBO_1jrCTarRA3W0nrzxvA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2013/3/16 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On 16 March 2013 09:07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> The thing is that that syntax creates an array of zero dimensions,
>>> not one that has 1 dimension and zero elements.
>
>> I'm going to ask the question that immediately comes to mind: Is there
>> anything good at all about being able to define a zero-dimensional
>> array?
>
> Perhaps not. I think for most uses, a 1-D zero-length array would be
> just as good. I guess what I'd want to know is whether we also need
> to support higher-dimensional zero-size arrays, and if so, what does
> the I/O syntax for those look like?
>
> Another fly in the ointment is that if we do redefine '{}' as meaning
> something other than a zero-D array, how will we handle existing
> database entries that are zero-D arrays?
>
a issue with zero dimension array is long story and I'' be really
happy when this story finish
Has somebody any useful example with zero dimensional array ?? Use
other programming languages zero dim array ??
Regards
Pavel
> regards, tom lane
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Brendan Jurd | 2013-03-16 19:06:43 | Re: Should array_length() Return NULL |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2013-03-16 18:31:44 | Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |