Where are we on this?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Dunstan wrote:
> Hi all
> 
> Here is an updated version of the enums patch. It has been brought up to 
> date and applies against current CVS HEAD. The original email is at [1], 
> and describes the implementation.
> 
> This version contains sgml documentation, and contains the missing 
> bounds checks and error codes noted in the last email.
> 
> As mentioned before, the only part that I'm not super keen on is the 
> hack required to pass the type oid in to the text-to-enum cast function, 
> since normally those take type mods but not type oids. I wasn't sure how 
> else to get a cast working though, short of allowing another type of 
> cast function which accepts type oids as well. That seemed overkill for 
> just one case, though, and was getting a bit beyond the realms of what I 
> wanted to get done with this patch.
> 
> Anyway, it's reasonably feature complete and should be appropriately 
> documented now, so feedback gratefully accepted.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Tom
> 
> [1] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-09/msg00000.php

[ application/x-gzip is not supported, skipping... ]

> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
> 
>                http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

• Enums patch v2 at 2006-12-19 02:34:36 from Tom Dunstan

Responses

• Re: Enums patch v2 at 2007-02-02 15:54:44 from Neil Conway

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Jim Nasby	Date: 2007-02-02 04:04:58
	Subject: Re: Archive log compression keeping physical log available in the crash recovery
Previous:	From: Jim Nasby	Date: 2007-02-02 03:46:48
	Subject: Re: SQL to get a table columns comments?

pgsql-patches by date

Next:	From: David Fetter	Date: 2007-02-02 05:11:42
	Subject: Re: writing new regexp functions
Previous:	From: Jeremy Drake	Date: 2007-02-02 03:29:35
	Subject: Re: [HACKERS] writing new regexp functions