| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: add label to enum syntax |
| Date: | 2010-10-25 18:41:29 |
| Message-ID: | 19791.1288032089@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
> On Oct 25, 2010, at 10:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I can see the point of that, but I don't find LABEL to be a particularly
>> great name for the elements of an enum type, and so I'm not in favor of
>> institutionalizing that name in the syntax. How about ADD VALUE?
> So the docs have called them "labels" for quite some time.
There are some places in the docs that use that term, but there are
others that don't. In any case, using the term in the SQL syntax
casts it in stone, not silly putty ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Divakar Singh | 2010-10-25 18:42:48 | Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2010-10-25 18:38:52 | Re: Postgres insert performance and storage requirement compared to Oracle |