Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: extensible enum types

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: extensible enum types
Date: 2010-06-18 19:18:51
Message-ID: 16830.1276888731@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Insert a sort order column into pg_enum, and rearrange the values in
>> that whenever the user wants to add a new value in a particular place.
>> You give up cheap comparisons in exchange for flexibility.  I think lots
>> of people would accept that tradeoff, especially if they could make it
>> per-datatype.

> But I'm not happy about giving up cheap comparison.

I don't think it would be all that bad.  We could teach typcache.c to
cache the ordering data for any type that's in active use.  It'd
certainly be a lot more expensive than OID comparison, but perhaps not
worse than NUMERIC comparisons.

> And how would it be per data-type?

Well, there'd be two kinds of enums, just as you were saying before.
I'm not sure how we'd expose that to users exactly, or whether there
could be provisions for switching a type's behavior after creation.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-06-18 19:37:13
Subject: Re: About tapes
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-06-18 19:16:28
Subject: Re: About tapes

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group