From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca" <movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: proposal - function string_to_table |
Date: | 2020-08-24 16:33:34 |
Message-ID: | CAFj8pRD9cYeQGQCP=K8+m+zitRidb=+B3YD764bLYP65V4mXwQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
po 24. 8. 2020 v 4:19 odesílatel Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> napsal:
> I have re-checked the string_to_table_20200821.patch.
>
> Below is one remaining problem.
>
> ====
>
> COMMENT (help text)
>
> + Splits the <parameter>string</parameter> at occurrences
> + of <parameter>delimiter</parameter> and forms the remaining data
> + into a table with one <type>text</type> type column.
> + If <parameter>delimiter</parameter> is <literal>NULL</literal>,
> + each character in the <parameter>string</parameter> will become a
> + separate element in the array.
>
> Seems like here is a cut/paste error from the string_to_array help text.
>
> "separate element in the array" should say "separate row of the table"
>
fixed
> ====
>
> >>> Maybe a different choice of function name would be more consistent
> >>> with what is already there?
> >>> e.g. split_to_table, string_split_to_table, etc.
> >>
> >> I don't agree. This function is twin (with almost identical behaviour)
> for "string_to_array" function, so I think so the name is correct.
>
> OK
>
> ====
>
please, check attached patch
Regards
Pavel
> Kind Regards,
> Peter Smith.
> Fujitsu Australia
>
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
string_to_table-20200824.patch | text/x-patch | 37.7 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrey M. Borodin | 2020-08-24 17:30:19 | Re: recovering from "found xmin ... from before relfrozenxid ..." |
Previous Message | Dilip Kumar | 2020-08-24 16:10:49 | Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions |