On Jun 21, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> I don't much like hstore(hstore, text[]) because it's not strictly a
> constructor. But I could certainly live with something based on the
> word slice. The existing SQL function backing the operator is called
> slice_hstore(), whereas I would probably prefer hstore_slice() or just
> slice(), but I can't talk about it right now because I have to go
> finish laundering the paint out of my entire wardrobe. Having already
> written three patches to rename this operator (to three different
> names), I'm in no hurry to write a fourth unless the degree of
> consensus is sufficient to convince me I shan't need to write a fifth
> one.
That seems wise. :-)
Best,
David
