| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Gregory Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fixed length data types issue |
| Date: | 2006-09-14 16:04:35 |
| Message-ID: | 200609141604.k8EG4ZP02105@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Gregory Stark wrote:
>
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>
> > Gregory Stark wrote:
> >>
> >> Well "char" doesn't have quite the same semantics as CHAR(1). If that's the
> >> consensus though then I can work on either fixing "char" semantics to match
> >> CHAR(1) or adding a separate type instead.
> >
> > What semantics?
>
> The main bit that comes to mind is 32::CHAR(1) give you '3' but 32::"char"
> gives you ' '.
>
> Really it makes more sense if you think of "char" is a 1 byte integer type
> with some extra text casts and operators to make C programmers happy, not a 1
> byte character type.
One very nifty trick would be to fix "char" to act as CHAR(), and map
CHAR(1) automatically to "char".
--
Bruce Momjian bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-09-14 16:22:10 | Mid cycle release? |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-09-14 16:01:56 | Re: [ADMIN] Vacuum error on database postgres |