| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Markus Schaber <schabi(at)logix-tt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: timestamptz alias |
| Date: | 2006-10-04 14:17:51 |
| Message-ID: | 4523C28F.4080404@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
Markus Schaber wrote:
> It's not only about documenting the pure existence of the aliases (which
> was already documented in the table on the datatype TOC page), it's also
> about telling the user which of the names are the ones to avoid, and the
> reasons to do so.
>
>
>
*blink* Why do any need to be avoided? What you use is a matter of
taste, and your organisation's coding standards. From a purely technical
POV I don't see any reason to avoid using either the canonical type
names or the various aliases.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Markus Schaber | 2006-10-04 15:52:17 | Re: timestamptz alias |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-10-04 14:05:07 | Re: [HACKERS] timestamptz alias |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-10-04 14:29:11 | Re: [HACKERS] DOC: catalog.sgml |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-10-04 14:05:07 | Re: [HACKERS] timestamptz alias |