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

Re: Anyone care about type "filename" ?

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Anyone care about type "filename" ?
Date: 2000-08-01 02:09:23
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.21.0007312308230.570-100000@thelab.hub.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> > I'm thinking of removing the datatype "filename", which is a fixed-size
> > array of 256 characters with no support functions other than input and
> > output converters.  Apparently it was once used in the system tables,
> > but it is so no longer AFAICT.  Since it's fixed-length, it cannot be
> > made TOASTable, which makes it substantially inferior to type "text"
> > for any purpose that I can think of.
> > 
> > Anyone using this type?
> 
> I vote for removal.

works for me too ...

curious though, but why would such a type even be used in the system
tables?  what difference does it have to a varchar(256)?


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Philip WarnerDate: 2000-08-01 03:06:51
Subject: Re: pg_dump & performance degradation
Previous:From: Philip WarnerDate: 2000-08-01 01:54:23
Subject: Re: pg_dump + function/table hierarchy

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