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

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL to PostgreSQL, was ENUM type

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Gregory Youngblood <pgcluster(at)netio(dot)org>,Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>,Chris Travers <chris(at)travelamericas(dot)com>,Merlin Moncure <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>,PostgreSQL advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>,pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] MySQL to PostgreSQL, was ENUM type
Date: 2005-07-29 19:56:59
Message-ID: 20050729195659.GD16537@alvh.no-ip.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-general
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 02:49:54PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 12:53:07AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Gregory Youngblood <pgcluster(at)netio(dot)org> writes:
> > > ... the problem is unsigned bigint in mysql to postgresql.  
> > > There's not another larger integer size that can be used that would  
> > > allow the 18446744073709551615 (is that the max value?) max value  
> > > available in mysql. Or am I missing something?
> > 
> > You'd have to translate that to NUMERIC, which would work but would
> > take a bit of a performance hit ...
> 
> Is there any serious impediment to adding unsigned types to PostgreSQL?
> They should be as readily supported as signed, right? I don't think
> these would even have to be in core, if that's a concern.

Tom mentioned a couple of days ago that the worst problems that would be
created by adding more numeric types are solved as of 8.1.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]alvh.no-ip.org>)
"Before you were born your parents weren't as boring as they are now. They
got that way paying your bills, cleaning up your room and listening to you
tell them how idealistic you are."  -- Charles J. Sykes' advice to teenagers

In response to

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-07-29 19:57:48
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] MySQL to PostgreSQL, was ENUM type
Previous:From: Jim C. NasbyDate: 2005-07-29 19:54:49
Subject: Re: schmooing at oscon

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-07-29 19:57:48
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] MySQL to PostgreSQL, was ENUM type
Previous:From: Jim C. NasbyDate: 2005-07-29 19:52:26
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] MySQL to PostgreSQL, was ENUM type

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