Tarantool discussions archive
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>
To: Nikita Pettik <korablev@tarantool.org>,
	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 22:07:50 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <85c30425-ae7f-b485-4be5-dcad0b1c1cb6@tarantool.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200928181913.GD14909@tarantool.org>

Hi!

See my response in another email with 4 big reasons why
storage of SQL-specific functions in _func is a bad idea.

Also see responses on your comments in separate sections.
I leave references below.

On 28.09.2020 20:19, Nikita Pettik wrote:
> 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,

See "## Built-in functions prevent duplicates in _func?".

> provides unified interface to invoke built-in and non-built-in functions,

See "## Storage in _func unifies functions?".

> allows to grant and verify priveleges in the same way and so forth.

See "## Built-in functions require privileges?".

> 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').

See "## Storage in _func does not change _func schema and documentation?".

> Finally part of functions can turn out to be really
> usefull in Lua someday such as date()/time().

See "## Reuse SQL functions in Lua and other languages?".

> So to me the choice is kind
> of obvious..

It still is not to me.

  reply	other threads:[~2020-09-28 20:07 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
2020-09-28 20:07   ` Vladislav Shpilevoy [this message]
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=85c30425-ae7f-b485-4be5-dcad0b1c1cb6@tarantool.org \
    --to=v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org \
    --cc=imeevma@tarantool.org \
    --cc=korablev@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