Horton

Re: patch: bytea_agg

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-12-23T19:19:34Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
> On fre, 2011-12-23 at 13:30 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
>> > On ons, 2011-12-21 at 11:04 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> >> this patch adds a bytea_agg aggregation.
>> >>
>> >> It allow fast bytea concatetation.
>> >
>> > Why not call it string_agg?  All the function names are the same between
>> > text and bytea (e.g., ||, substr, position, length).  It would be nice
>> > not to introduce arbitrary differences.
>>
>> Well, because it doesn't operate on strings.
>
> Sure, binary strings.  Both the SQL standard and the PostgreSQL
> documentation use that term.

I'm unimpressed by that argument, but let's see what other people think.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company