Re: [BUGS] BUG #9652: inet types don't support min/max - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Asif Naeem
Subject Re: [BUGS] BUG #9652: inet types don't support min/max
Date
Msg-id CAEB4t-MggyoBPGrxnxKejUroDAkH=g=0eWDT6S_5QX6VpkU8Fw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [BUGS] BUG #9652: inet types don't support min/max  (Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [BUGS] BUG #9652: inet types don't support min/max  (Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi Haribabu,

Sorry for being late. Thank you for sharing updated patch, sgml changes seems not working i.e.

postgres=# select max('192.168.1.5', '192.168.1.4');
ERROR:  function max(unknown, unknown) does not exist
LINE 1: select max('192.168.1.5', '192.168.1.4');
               ^
HINT:  No function matches the given name and argument types. You might need to add explicit type casts.
postgres=# select min('192.168.1.5', '192.168.1.4');
ERROR:  function min(unknown, unknown) does not exist
LINE 1: select min('192.168.1.5', '192.168.1.4');
               ^
HINT:  No function matches the given name and argument types. You might need to add explicit type casts.

I would suggest the following or similar changes e.g.

doc/src/sgml/func.sgml
        </indexterm>
        <function>max(<replaceable class="parameter">expression</replaceable>)</function>
       </entry>
-      <entry>any array, numeric, string, or date/time type</entry>
+      <entry>any inet, array, numeric, string, or date/time type</entry>
       <entry>same as argument type</entry>
       <entry>
        maximum value of <replaceable
@@ -12204,7 +12228,7 @@ NULL baz</literallayout>(3 rows)</entry>
        </indexterm>
        <function>min(<replaceable class="parameter">expression</replaceable>)</function>
       </entry>
-      <entry>any array, numeric, string, or date/time type</entry>
+      <entry>any inet, array, numeric, string, or date/time type</entry>
       <entry>same as argument type</entry>
       <entry>
        minimum value of <replaceable

Other than this patch looks good to me. Thanks.

Regards,
Muhammad Asif Naeem

On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 6:59 PM, Asif Naeem <anaeem.it@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Haribabu,
>
> Thank you for sharing the patch. I have spent some time to review the
> changes. Overall patch looks good to me, make check and manual testing seems
> run fine with it. There seems no related doc/sgml changes ?. Patch added
> network_smaller() and network_greater() functions but in PG source code,
> general practice seems to be to use “smaller" and “larger” as related
> function name postfix e.g. timestamp_smaller()/timestamp_larger(),
> interval_smaller/interval_larger(), cashsmaller()/cashlarger() etc. Thanks.

Thanks for reviewing the patch.

I corrected the function names as smaller and larger.
and also added documentation changes.

Updated patch attached in the mail.

Regards,
Hari Babu
Fujitsu Australia

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: timeout of pg_receivexlog --status-interval
Next
From: Shigeru Hanada
Date:
Subject: Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW