> On 03 May 2016, at 00:59, David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> wrote: > > On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 01:58:11PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> I wrote: >>> I think we'd be better off to rename these to tsvector_delete() >>> and tsvector_filter() while we still can. >> >> ... although I now notice that hstore already exposes a function >> named delete(), so that ship may have sailed already. But I'm more >> troubled by filter() anyhow, since that keyword can appear in >> expressions --- it seems much more likely that that would pose a >> parsing conflict after future SQL extensions. > > I suspect that steering that ship would be a good idea starting with > deprecation of the old name in 9.6, etc. hs_filter(), perhaps? > > Cheers, > David.
In 9.5 there already were tsvector functions length(), numnode(), strip() Recent commit added setweight(), delete(), unnest(), tsvector_to_array(), array_to_tsvector(), filter(). Last bunch can be painlessly renamed, for example to ts_setweight, ts_delete, ts_unnest, ts_filter. The question is what to do with old ones? Leave them as is? Rename to ts_* and create aliases with deprecation warning? -- Stas Kelvich Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com Russian Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
