Re: New array functions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joe Conway
Subject Re: New array functions
Date
Msg-id 3F4E6B3D.4020902@joeconway.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: New array functions  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: New array functions
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> What I'm thinking of doing is removing the code, and replacing the
> README with a note explaining how to convert contrib/array queries to
> use the new mainstream syntaxes.  That will give contrib/array users
> a clue what they're supposed to do.  In a release or three the README
> could go away too.

I have no objection to removing it now, but previously I think you 
agreed with Bruce's comment that we should leave it intact (but 
deprecated) for 7.4, and remove in 7.5.

> Also, does anyone want to look for possible dead code in intagg and
> so on?

I did a quick review back in July.

IIRC, intagg could be functionally replaced with the aggregate 
definition that I posted, except that intagg is probably a fair bit 
better performance (I didn't actually test), in that it accumulates the 
array in backend memory and just pushes pointers around as int4's. I've 
thought that a safer implementation would be needed to fold it into the 
backend (maybe using hashes keyed with the pointer?), but in any case 
that's a 7.5 thing.

Also IIRC there were some functions in intarray that overlap the new 
backend functionality, but much of it (i.e. using GIST to index into 
large arrays) is not.

I'll try to review them again and make a recommendation in the next 
couple of days, but it might be a stretch because I'm trying to tie up 
lots of loose ends in preparation for a trip next week.

Joe



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Bumping block size to 16K on FreeBSD...
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: New array functions