On Aug 8, 2007, at 12:18 , Decibel! wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 12:03:34PM -0500, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
>> Personally, I think expandarray is more appropriate and its
>> functionality probably more generally useful, as it identifies the
>> array indices as well. Note you can also rename the columns.
>
> Sure. My point is that we should have a way to convert arrays to sets
> and back in the backend.
Can't really argue with you there, as I find array_accum myself.
(Though I'd still nit-pick that this isn't an array to set
conversion, but rather array to--possibly single-column--table.)
Michael Glaesemann
grzm seespotcode net
