Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] Update of bitmask type

> OK, I'll have a go at this as I get a chance. If somebody has the SQL
> standard on line and could send me the appropriate sections I would
> appreciate it.

I have a text version of the SQL92 draft standard. Let me know if you
want the whole thing.

> As I know very little about the postgres internals I would also
> appreciate a short roadmap as to what needs to be done where, i.e. does
> the parser need to be changed, and where the files are /new files hsould
> go that I need to update. If this is somewhere in the docs please point
> me to it.
> What I've found upto now is
> backend/utils/adt/varlena.c
> backend/utils/adt/varchar.c
> which I will use as starting point?

That's probably the right place to look. I'll help with the parser
issues; the first thing to do is to figure out the appropriate
behavior and implement the underlying types. Then we can modify the
parser (backend/parser/gram.y) to support SQL92->Postgres internal
type syntax, just as is done for char and numeric types.

> I found the file src/backend/lib/bit.c (Bruce's according to the log
> message). Has that got anything to do with bit arrays?

Yes it does, but not as a user-accessible type. btw, if you go by the
cvs logs, Bruce owns *every* file in the tree since he does wholesale
reformatting on files; in this case the code has been there since the
beginning.

Looks like it might be a good start at some underlying utilities for
what you want though, and it is OK to reuse them.
                    - Thomas

-- 
Thomas Lockhart                lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California