Re: Distinct types

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, "PG Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Distinct types
Date: 2008-11-28 22:53:19
Message-ID: 493021FF.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>>> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> If it's going to take a significant amount of work then I think
someone
> ought to provide an actual justification why it's worth the work.

This by itself doesn't justify the effort, but I've worked with
databases which would refuse to allow comparison (including within
JOIN conditions) of values if they were in different domains, and I
miss that. It would occasionally keep people from making dumb
mistakes that wasted time. It would also be nice to be able to
prevent inappropriate use of data, as previously mentioned. I'm
afraid I don't have any interest less mundane than that, and ease of
use would need to be there in order for it to be useful.

I would actually like to see comparisons to literals or expressions of
the base type work, although that doesn't seem to be in line with the
SQL spec, and I suspect it might not play nice with the implicit
casting.

-Kevin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2008-11-28 23:11:39 Re: Distinct types
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-11-28 22:52:03 Re: HEAD build failure on win32 mingw