Re: Enum proposal / design
От | Greg Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Enum proposal / design |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 87ejvfybll.fsf@stark.xeocode.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Enum proposal / design ("Tom Dunstan" <pgsql@tomd.cc>) |
Ответы |
Re: Enum proposal / design
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Tom Dunstan" <pgsql@tomd.cc> writes: > I didn't really want to go down that path in this thread > since it would turn what should be a fairly non-intrusive > patch to add a new type into a big thing, and I really just > wanted to get enums in. :) I tend to think of it the other > way around from how you put it: if a general solution to > that problem can be found which does fall afoul of the > security issues that were the reason for multi-argument > output functions to be killed off in the first place, then > great, and enums can directly benefit. True. Perhaps it's reasonable to use a 8-byte representation in the name of getting the user-visible feature in. Knowing that the fundamental problem will eventually be solved and the implementation can eventually be improved transparently to use 1 to 4 byte storage. -- greg
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: