Re: Bit strings
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Bit strings |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 16747.970548127@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Bit strings (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Bit strings
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
>>>> Can we get the BIT type working now that 7.1 is branched? I did some work on the BIT types a couple months ago. According to my notes, the following issues are still outstanding before they can be said to work at all: Bit and hexstring literals are not handled in a reasonable fashion; the scanner converts them to integer constants which is bogus. Probably they need to be converted to some generic 'UNKNOWNBITSTRING' pseudo-type that can later be coerced to a specific bitstring type. I didn't touch this because it seems to open up the Pandora's box of unknown-constant handling, for which we do not have a good general solution. SQL92 sez we need a position() function for bitstrings. Need a regression test for bit types. scalarltsel() and friends need to cope with bit/varbit types in order to make good use of indexes on bitstrings. pg_dump does not handle BIT/VARBIT lengths properly (pjw may have fixed this by now). regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: