Re: SQL99 ARRAY support proposal - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: SQL99 ARRAY support proposal
Date
Msg-id 18272.1047316826@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SQL99 ARRAY support proposal  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes:
> So if I understand correctly, all instances of anyarray and anyelement 
> in a function definition would need to be self-consistent, but the group 
> could represent essentially any datatype with its corresponding array 
> type. If we need more than one of these self consistent groups, we could 
> resort to anyarray1/anyelement1, etc. Does this sound correct?

Right.

> Also, an implementation question: if I have a type oid for an element, 
> what is the preferred method for determining the corresponding array? 
> I'm thinking that the most efficient method might be to use the 
> element-type name with a '_' prepended to get the array-type oid, but 
> that seems ugly. Thoughts?

I was thinking about that earlier.  Right now there is no other way.
We could consider adding a column to pg_type to link to the array type,
but I'm not sure it's worth the trouble.  I think if you look around,
there's probably already a subroutine someplace that does the lookup
using the '_foo' approach.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Jason M. Felice"
Date:
Subject: Re: SQL99 ARRAY support proposal
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Backends created by ODBC live forever ...