| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Shigeru HANADA <hanada(at)metrosystems(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SQL/MED - core functionality |
| Date: | 2010-11-25 17:30:16 |
| Message-ID: | 15086.1290706216@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> On 25.11.2010 18:28, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Or just specify a format for the extra information. Perhaps it could be
>> thought of as being a value of type bytea? Obviously we can't just have
>> a fixed amount of info, but maybe a blob with a length word is enough.
> That seems quite awkward to work with. Let's at least make it a Node *,
> so that you can store a Value or List there, or anything else that
> already has copyObject support.
Yeah, that works. A struct could be emulated by using a List with a
known order of elements. If someone did need a binary blob, they could
represent it as a Const of type bytea.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-11-25 17:34:14 | Re: Regression Tests (opr) Sanity |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-11-25 17:23:03 | Re: [JDBC] JDBC and Binary protocol error, for some statements |