> On 04 May 2016, at 16:58, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Stas Kelvich <s.kelv...@postgrespro.ru> writes:
>>> On 03 May 2016, at 00:59, David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> wrote:
>>> 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?
>> 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?
> The other ones are not so problematic because they do not conflict with
> SQL keywords.  It's only delete() and filter() that scare me.
>                       regards, tom lane

Okay, so changed functions to ts_setweight, ts_delete, ts_unnest, ts_filter.

Attachment: tsvector_ops_rename.diff
Description: Binary data

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:

Reply via email to