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

Re: implemented missing bitSetBit() and bitGetBit()

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, David Helgason <david(at)uti(dot)is>,pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: implemented missing bitSetBit() and bitGetBit()
Date: 2004-02-12 16:05:18
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Neil Conway wrote:
> > David Helgason <david(at)uti(dot)is> writes:
> > > I needed these, so I went and implemented them myself.
> >
> > I didn't see any followup to this: do we want to include this in the
> > main tree, contrib/, or not at all?
> getbit sounds a lot like what substring() does.  So perhaps setbit could 
> actually be handled by replace()?  That would be a more general 
> solution (since it would handle more than one bit at a time).

Added to TODO:

	* Allow substring/replace() to get/set bit values

  Bruce Momjian                        |
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: scott.marloweDate: 2004-02-12 16:18:53
Subject: Re: Idea about better configuration options for sort memory
Previous:From: Stephan SzaboDate: 2004-02-12 16:04:53
Subject: Re: 7.4 - FK constraint performance

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group