| From: | Isaac Morland <isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Luzanov <p(dot)luzanov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Things I don't like about \du's "Attributes" column |
| Date: | 2023-12-30 14:33:59 |
| Message-ID: | CAMsGm5fDAVUTPeLAK-CjhrC7obQd-+i0EFPzAHFTMQrRoFaydA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 30 Dec 2023 at 09:23, Pavel Luzanov <p(dot)luzanov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
wrote:
> I think that writing the value "infinity" in places where there is no
> value is
> not a good thing. This hides the real value of the column. In addition,
> there is no reason to set "infinity" when the password is always valid with
> default NULL.
>
Would it make sense to make the column non-nullable and always set it to
infinity when there is no expiry?
In this case, I think NULL simply means infinity, so why not write that? If
the timestamp type didn't have infinity, then NULL would be a natural way
of saying that there is no expiry, but with infinity as a possible value, I
don't see any reason to think of no expiry as being the absence of an
expiry time rather than an infinite expiry time.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jacob Burroughs | 2023-12-30 15:05:27 | Re: Add new protocol message to change GUCs for usage with future protocol-only GUCs |
| Previous Message | Pavel Luzanov | 2023-12-30 14:23:40 | Re: Things I don't like about \du's "Attributes" column |