Re: unnesting multirange data types
Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
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: 2021-06-15T13:10:21Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 4:14 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> wrote: > 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. Pushed! Thanks to thread participants for raising this topic and review. I'll be around to resolve issues if any. ------ Regards, Alexander Korotkov
Commits
-
Fix small inconsistencies in catalog definition of multirange operators
- 4d39d4e639b4 14.0 landed
- 768ea9bcf981 15.0 landed
-
Revert 29854ee8d1 due to buildfarm failures
- 817bb0a7d1e0 14.0 landed
-
Copy-edit text for the pg_terminate_backend() "timeout" parameter.
- 0aac73e6a260 14.0 cited
-
Add missing pg_description strings for pg_type entries.
- b09a64d602a1 12.0 cited
-
Fix pg_description entries for jsonb_to_record() and jsonb_to_recordset().
- a4627e8fd479 9.6.0 cited
-
docs: clarify JSONB operator descriptions
- b852dc4cbd09 9.6.0 cited
-
Set procost to 10 for each of the pg_foo_is_visible() functions.
- a80889a7359e 9.3.0 cited
-
Make use of LATERAL in information_schema.sequences view.
- c246eb5aafe6 9.3.0 cited
-
Add pg_trigger_depth() function
- 74ab96a45ef6 9.2.0 cited
-
Add database comments to template0 and postgres databases, and improve
- ddd6ff289f25 9.1.0 cited