From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: bitwise and/or aggregate functions? |
Date: | 2004-04-28 06:46:09 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.58.0404280836130.28436@sablons.cri.ensmp.fr |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > Would it be appropriate to contribute BIT_AND and BIT_OR aggregates
>
> I am confused why you would use bit on integers
Well, (I think) I need them to manipulate pg_catalog's aclitem bitfields.
I plea not guilty for the design of pg_catalog;-)
Moreover, I added aclitem accessors which return INT4 in a recent patch
that you kindly applied.
> when there is a bit type with an AND operator:
> pg_catalog | & | bit | bit | bit | bitwise and
Sure. "&" is also available for all integer types.
BTW, I'm arguing about AGGREGATE functions, and there is no aggregate
functions at the time, neither for int* nor for bit.
SELECT BIT_OR(aclitem_privs(...)) AS effective_privs
FROM ...
WHERE aclitem_grantee(...)=... AND ... ;
Or maybe I cannot understand why you're confused?
--
Fabien Coelho - coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2004-04-28 07:07:59 | Re: bitwise and/or aggregate functions? |
Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2004-04-28 06:30:04 | Re: PITR Phase 2 - Design Planning |