From: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: MULTISET and additional functions for ARRAY |
Date: | 2010-11-12 01:27:18 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTiny1u+UYVMJ6--44zsGEfj_qPqiRcifocoJ5ef+@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 03:05, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
>> So are you planning to implement multisets? It's a feature I'd love to see
>
> What actual functionality does it buy? AFAICT from Itagaki-san's
> description, it's an array only you ignore the specific element order.
> So what? You can write functions that work that way now.
I think there are almost no difference between a multiset and an array
in terms of functions I described in the first mail.
However, if we have separated multiset data type, we could have special
comparison operators for them; "array = array" returns true only if they
have the same elements in the same order, but "multiset = multiset" only
checks elements in them. Also, we could optimize on-disk structure of
multiset for fast UNION operations or for dataset that has many duplicates.
For example, we could use a sorted array of {value, count} pairs.
If we decide to have data type IDs for multiset, I'll go for it (ex. int4,
_int4, and an additional $int4), but it consumes +50% of typoids. If it
is not preferable, only function support might be better at the first try.
--
Itagaki Takahiro
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2010-11-12 01:29:08 | Re: Delimited identifier brhavior |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-11-12 00:08:03 | Re: Delimited identifier brhavior |