Re: @ versus ~, redux - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: @ versus ~, redux
Date
Msg-id 27504.1157312503@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: @ versus ~, redux  (Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>)
Responses Re: @ versus ~, redux  (jreich@root.net)
List pgsql-hackers
Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su> writes:
>>> 3. Leave the existing op names as-is in core and contrib, but consider
>>> them deprecated and add new ops with consistently-chosen names.
>>> (The new ops introduced by GIN should only exist with the new names.)

> #3 looks good to me. Too many users.

Not only that, but it'd be a serious problem for something like a SQL
script to be cross-version-compatible if we reverse the meanings of the
existing operators.

AFAIK all the operators in question exist only in GIST opclasses, so one
possible solution to the multiple-operators-per-slot problem is to
extend the opclasses --- ie, teach the gist_consistent methods to
support two different strategy numbers that do the same thing.  Ugly
and tedious, but it'd preserve backward compatibility.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Getting a move on for 8.2 beta
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Getting a move on for 8.2 beta