From: Nikita Pettik <korablev@tarantool.org> To: Mergen Imeev <imeevma@tarantool.org> Cc: tarantool-discussions@dev.tarantool.org Subject: Re: [Tarantool-discussions] SQL built-in functions position Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2020 18:19:13 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20200928181913.GD14909@tarantool.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <66362762-8791-bea3-745f-afc1e3eaa199@tarantool.org> On 27 Sep 18:18, Mergen Imeev wrote: > Hi all. I have a question that I would like to discuss. > > The question is about SQL built-in functions. At the moment these functions > are > partially described in _func and partially in src/box/sql/func.c. I received > two > completely different suggestions from my reviewers on what to do with these > functions: > 1) Move definitions completely to _func. Remove definitions from func.c. That's my proposal. It makes name collisions check simple, provides unified interface to invoke built-in and non-built-in functions, allows to grant and verify priveleges in the same way and so forth. Built-ins are already declaraed in _func, so reverting this thing would result in another one unnecessary schema change and upgrade (so I doubt that implementation would be somehow 'simpler'). Finally part of functions can turn out to be really usefull in Lua someday such as date()/time(). So to me the choice is kind of obvious.. > 2) Move definitions completely to func.c. Remove definitions from _func. > > In the first case, users will be able to see the function definitions. Also, > in > the future, we may allow these functions to be called from Lua (although not > sure if this is necessary). The main idea is 'all functions have the same > interface'. > > In the second case, the implementation is simpler, and we can more easily > implement some features, such as "virtual" functions. For users, the > definition > can only be seen in the documentation. The main idea is 'SQL built-in > functions > are part of SQL'. > > Which of these approaches do you think is more beneficial to us? >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-28 18:19 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-09-27 15:18 Mergen Imeev 2020-09-27 20:56 ` Peter Gulutzan 2020-09-28 20:07 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy 2020-09-29 19:22 ` Peter Gulutzan 2020-09-28 18:19 ` Nikita Pettik [this message] 2020-09-28 20:07 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy 2020-09-28 20:07 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy 2020-10-01 14:46 ` Kirill Yukhin 2020-10-01 21:15 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy 2020-10-02 15:18 ` Mergen Imeev
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20200928181913.GD14909@tarantool.org \ --to=korablev@tarantool.org \ --cc=imeevma@tarantool.org \ --cc=tarantool-discussions@dev.tarantool.org \ --subject='Re: [Tarantool-discussions] SQL built-in functions position' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox