From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jim Jones <jim(dot)jones(at)uni-muenster(dot)de> |
Cc: | Chapman Flack <jcflack(at)acm(dot)org>, Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: XMLDocument (SQL/XML X030) |
Date: | 2025-01-23 15:14:35 |
Message-ID: | CAFj8pRAWFoc=6k4OYo30h3eqp7dPOKYYG5MTM_tre0f6bbBQ2w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi
čt 23. 1. 2025 v 16:06 odesílatel Jim Jones <jim(dot)jones(at)uni-muenster(dot)de>
napsal:
> Hi
>
> On 23.01.25 07:50, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > I think so in this form (just forward input to output) I have no
> > objection.
> >
> > There is a benefit with a) possible zero work with migration from db2,
> > b) nobody needs to repeat a work which is a correct implementation of
> > XMLDOCUMENT function.
> >
> > Maybe opened question can be implementation like classic scalar
> > function or via XmlExpr
> >
> > In this moment I prefer to use XmlExpr from consistency reasons
>
>
> To keep it consistent with the existing code, I think this function is
> in the right place. There are similar functions in xml.c, e.g.
> xmltotext, texttoxml.
>
These functions are cast functions - they should be V1 functions only -
casting cannot work with pseudo functions.
But it is true, so xmlcomment is not a pseudo function either. So minimally
this function is precedent, so there is not strong dependency on XmlExp,
which I expected.
> I updated the function comment and commit message (v4 attached) to make
> things clearer.
>
> Since the status of this patch is waiting on author, is there anything
> else I should take a look / improve?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Best regards,Jim
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2025-01-23 15:31:09 | Re: SQL:2011 application time |
Previous Message | Japin Li | 2025-01-23 15:13:39 | Re: Compression of bigger WAL records |