Re: Enum proposal / design

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Dunstan <pgsql(at)tomd(dot)cc>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Enum proposal / design
Date: 2006-08-16 20:13:43
Message-ID: 28234.1155759223@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Dunstan <pgsql(at)tomd(dot)cc> writes:
> I thought the runtime one was kinda cute, actually, but you would have
> to have duplicate functions for the differently sized types, eg.
> enum1_out, enum2_out etc since otherwise you wouldn't know what sized
> parameter you were just handed.

I'm not sure that that matters really. What you are actually going to
get handed is a Datum that IIRC is right-justified and zero-padded, so
very probably one function would work for all stored widths. The bigger
issue I think is the surprise factor if a column gets wider over a dump
and reload.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2006-08-16 20:47:12 Re: [HACKERS] Forcing current WAL file to be archived
Previous Message mdean 2006-08-16 19:33:23 Re: BugTracker (Was: Re: 8.2 features status)