Re: nested hstore patch

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: nested hstore patch
Date: 2013-12-23 15:47:58
Message-ID: CAFj8pRBtVugAn4DyOmWuqMZASz=1a=Ro1O4DEYgRX_7o5aRSZQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello

2013/12/23 Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>

> On 12/23/2013 12:28 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 6:16 PM, David E. Wheeler <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >> * New operators:
> >> + `hstore -> int`: Get string value at array index (starting at 0)
> >> + `hstore ^> text`: Get numeric value for key
> >> + `hstore ^> int`: Get numeric value at array index
> >> + `hstore ?> text`: Get boolean value for key
> >> + `hstore ?> int`: Get boolean value at array index
> >> + `hstore #> text[]`: Get string value for key path
> >> + `hstore #^> text[]`: Get numeric value for key path
> >> + `hstore #?> text[]`: Get boolean value for key path
> >> + `hstore %> text`: Get hstore value for key
> >> + `hstore %> int`: Get hstore value at array index
> >> + `hstore #%> text[]`: Get hstore value for key path
> >> + `hstore ? int`: Does hstore contain array index
> >> + `hstore #? text[]`: Does hstore contain key path
> >> + `hstore - int`: Delete index from left operand
> >> + `hstore #- text[]`: Delete key path from left operand
> > Although in some ways there's a certain elegance to this, it also
> > sorta looks like punctuation soup. I can't help wondering whether
> > we'd be better off sticking to function names.
> >
> Has anybody looked into how hard it would be to add "method" notation
> to postgreSQL, so that instead of calling
>
> getString(hstorevalue, n)
>
> we could use
>
> hstorevalue.getString(n)
>

yes, I played with it some years ago. I ended early, there was a problem
with parser - when I tried append a new rule. And because there was not
simple solution, I didn't continue.

But it can be nice feature - minimally for plpgsql coders.

Regards

Pavel

>
> --
> Hannu Krosing
> PostgreSQL Consultant
> Performance, Scalability and High Availability
> 2ndQuadrant Nordic OÜ
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2013-12-23 15:49:12 Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2013-12-23 15:46:19 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Upgrade to Autoconf 2.69