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

Re: [HACKERS] Bit strings

From: Adriaan Joubert <a(dot)joubert(at)albourne(dot)com>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: Postgresql <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Bit strings
Date: 2000-01-30 14:43:18
Message-ID: 38944E06.DA17AE62@albourne.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Thomas Lockhart wrote:

> If the code works or can be made workable we should integrate it imho.
> There is not likely to be any good excuse to keep out an
> SQL92-compliant type.

Nobody else replied, so I guess we can go ahead. Let me know if there is
anything I can do, or you need any explanations to the code, etc.

Adriaan


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-01-30 15:41:13
Subject: Another nasty cache problem
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-01-30 06:32:51
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] freefuncs.c is never called from anywhere!?

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