Re: Creating a 'SET' type
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Creating a 'SET' type |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9092.976726559@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Creating a 'SET' type ("Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes: > However, is it possible to create a type that has different parameters > wherever it is used. > For instance - the varchar type takes as a parameter the max characters in > the field. Although there is only one varchar type, it has different > properties depending on whether or not it is varchar(5) or varchar(20). Right now, that support is hard-wired into the parser for each such type (and there aren't many). It might be interesting to look at what it would take to make a generalized mechanism whereby a type name could accept parameters, with a type-specific routine being responsible for reducing the parameters down to a typmod value. One problem you'd run into, I think, is creation of parsing ambiguities --- is NUMERIC(9,2) a type specification, or a function call? Right now it's a type spec because NUMERIC is a keyword in the grammar, but that won't do for an extensible mechanism. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: