| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com>, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, "andreas(at)proxel(dot)se" <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: general purpose array_sort |
| Date: | 2024-10-24 15:11:33 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwYTorYsxiOW0Mh7oS-bqrGt9RCibPfw7K=on21Cj9EckA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 7:58 AM Aleksander Alekseev <
aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > It's hardly "general purpose" if it randomly refuses to
> > sort certain types. I would say it should be able to sort
> > anything that ORDER BY will handle --- and that certainly
> > includes the cases shown here.
>
> I wonder how useful / convenient the new function will be considering
> that we already have CTEs and can do:
>
> SELECT array_agg(x ORDER BY x) FROM unnest(ARRAY[5,1,3,2,4]) AS x;
>
> Perhaps there are use cases I didn't consider?
>
>
Succinctness of expression. Plus I'm under the impression that a function
doing this is going to be somewhat faster than composing two functions
together within a multi-node subtree.
I feel like the same observation could have been made for array_shuffle but
we added that. This function being added feels to me like just completing
the set.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | vignesh C | 2024-10-24 15:17:37 | Re: Pgoutput not capturing the generated columns |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2024-10-24 15:03:15 | Re: Inconsistent use of relpages = -1 |