Re: generic builtin functions

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: generic builtin functions
Date: 2005-11-10 22:26:45
Message-ID: 4373C925.7020009@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

David Fetter wrote:

>On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 04:08:29PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
>>Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I'm not convinced that using bigint-equivalent space for an enum is
>>>a mortal sin...
>>>
>>>
>>at least venial ...
>>
>>
>
>Heh.
>
>Would ORDER BY somehow know about enums' given ordering?
>
>
>
>

ORDER BY (and all inequality operators) will reflect the defined
enumeration ordering, as happens today with enumkit-defined types.

That is a fundamental requirement that I won't deviate from.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Olivier Thauvin 2005-11-10 22:29:15 Module incompatibility detection between 8.0 and 8.1
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2005-11-10 22:19:16 Re: generic builtin functions