Re: ENUM type

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org, Chris Travers <chris(at)travelamericas(dot)com>
Subject: Re: ENUM type
Date: 2005-07-26 22:34:11
Message-ID: 20050726223411.GF26758@decibel.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 03:30:11PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > That's a good idea for a stop-gap, or if no one wants to put the effort
> > into creating a useful enum type.
>
> I'm personally not convinced that ENUM *is* useful.

ENUM as MySQL does it, or as something that consolodates the many steps
involved in setting up a simple normalized view for a field that
provides automatic mapping so that the application thinks it's just
dealing with a text/varchar? ISTM that given how common the use case is
and the non-trivial amount of code involved that it's worth attempting.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828

Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2005-07-26 22:39:46 Re: ENUM type
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2005-07-26 22:30:11 Re: ENUM type

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin McArthur 2005-07-26 22:36:26 RESULT_OID Bug
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2005-07-26 22:31:18 Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC