Re: Do we want a hashset type? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Do we want a hashset type?
Date
Msg-id 2920416.1687181568@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Do we want a hashset type?  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> Yes, Multisets (a.k.a. bags and a large number of other names) would be 
> interesting. But I wouldn't like to abandon pure sets either. Maybe a 
> typmod indicating the allowed multiplicity of the type?

I don't think trying to use typmod to carry fundamental semantic
information will work, because we drop it in too many places
(e.g. there's no way to pass it through a function).  If you want
both sets and multisets, they'll need to be two different container
types, even if code is shared under the hood.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Jonathan S. Katz"
Date:
Subject: Re: psql: Add role's membership options to the \du+ command
Next
From: Yugo NAGATA
Date:
Subject: Re: Make pgbench exit on SIGINT more reliably