On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Douglas McNaught wrote:
> David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'm all in favor of having associative arrays as a 1st-class data type
> > in PostgreSQL. How much harder would it be to make these generally
> > available vs. tied to one particular language?
>
> We already have them--they're called "tables with primary keys". :)
>
> What's the use-case for these things? Just imitating Oracle?
>
> -Doug
>
no
for example
DECLARE _d varchar[] INDEX BY VARCHAR = {'cmd1' => '723:t:f:1', 'cmd2'=>..
BEGIN
FOR r IN SELECT * FROM data LOOP
check_params(_r, _d[_r.cmd])
END LOOP;
or without assoc. arrays
DECLARE _d varchar;
BEGIN
FOR r IN SELECT * FROM data LOOP
SELECT INTO par _d WHERE cmd = _r.cmd;
check_params(_r, _d)
END LOOP;
I can't to speak about speed without tests but I can expect so hash array
can be much faster. This sample is easy, but I can have procedure witch
operate over big arrays of numbers(prices) and I need save somewhere this
arrays if I don't wont to read them again and again. And if I have in
data identification by key, I everytime have to find key, and translate it
into number
Regards
Pavel Stehule
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
