| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: extensible enum types |
| Date: | 2010-06-18 16:59:10 |
| Message-ID: | 4C1BA5DE.2090501@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Jun 18, 2010, at 9:34 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
>> I'd be perfectly happy to hear a reasonable alternative. Assuming we use some integer representation, given two labels represented by n and n+1, we can't add a label between them without rewriting the tables that use the type, whether it's my representation scheme or some other. Maybe we could have a FORCE option which would rewrite if necessary.
>>
>
> People would likely always use it.
>
> Why not use a decimal number?
>
>
>
You are just bumping up the storage cost. Part of the attraction of
enums is their efficiency.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2010-06-18 17:03:38 | Re: hstore ==> and deprecate => |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-06-18 16:56:14 | Re: extensible enum types |