Re: extensible enum types
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: extensible enum types |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4C1BA5DE.2090501@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: extensible enum types ("David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: extensible enum types
Re: extensible enum types |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
David E. Wheeler wrote: > On Jun 18, 2010, at 9:34 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > >> I'd be perfectly happy to hear a reasonable alternative. Assuming we use some integer representation, given two labelsrepresented by n and n+1, we can't add a label between them without rewriting the tables that use the type, whetherit's my representation scheme or some other. Maybe we could have a FORCE option which would rewrite if necessary. >> > > People would likely always use it. > > Why not use a decimal number? > > > You are just bumping up the storage cost. Part of the attraction of enums is their efficiency. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: