Horton

Re: unnesting multirange data types

Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
To: "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-06-14T13:14:40Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 3:50 PM Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:
> On 6/13/21 5:18 PM, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
>
> >> "Expands an array into a set of rows. The array's elements are read out
> >> in storage order."
> >>
> >> If we tweaked the multirange "unnest" function, we could change it to:
> >>
> >> +       <para>
> >> +        Expands a multirange into a set of rows.
> >> +        The ranges are read out in storage order (ascending).
> >> +       </para>
> >>
> >> to match what the array "unnest" function docs, or
> >>
> >> +       <para>
> >> +        Expands a multirange into a set of rows that each
> >> +        contain an individual range.
> >> +        The ranges are read out in storage order (ascending).
> >> +       </para>
> >>
> >> to be a bit more specific. However, I think this is also bordering on
> >> overengineering the text, given there has been a lack of feedback on the
> >> "unnest" array function description being confusing.
> >
> > I think it's not necessarily to say about rows here.  Our
> > documentation already has already a number of examples, where we
> > describe set of returned values without speaking about rows including:
> > json_array_elements, json_array_elements_text, json_object_keys,
> > pg_listening_channels, pg_tablespace_databases...
>
> I do agree -- my main point was that I don't think we need to change
> anything. I proposed alternatives just to show some other ways of
> looking at it. But as I mentioned, at this point I think it's
> overengineering the text.
>
> If folks are good with the method + code, I think this is ready.

Cool, thank you for the summary.  I'll wait for two days since I've
published the last revision of the patch [1] (comes tomorrow), and
push it if no new issues arise.

Links
1. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAPpHfdvG%3DJR5kqmZx7KvTyVgtQePX0QJ09TO1y3sN73WOfJf1Q%40mail.gmail.com

------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov

Commits

  1. Fix small inconsistencies in catalog definition of multirange operators

  2. Revert 29854ee8d1 due to buildfarm failures

  3. Copy-edit text for the pg_terminate_backend() "timeout" parameter.

  4. Add missing pg_description strings for pg_type entries.

  5. Fix pg_description entries for jsonb_to_record() and jsonb_to_recordset().

  6. docs: clarify JSONB operator descriptions

  7. Set procost to 10 for each of the pg_foo_is_visible() functions.

  8. Make use of LATERAL in information_schema.sequences view.

  9. Add pg_trigger_depth() function

  10. Add database comments to template0 and postgres databases, and improve