Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Friday 28 November 2008 18:49:17 Tom Lane wrote:
>> The problem I see with distinct types is that the typing is *too*
>> strong --- the datatype has in fact got no usable operations whatever.
> You are supposed to define your own. It's a new type after all. You only
> borrow the representation from an existing one.
And the I/O functions ... and you still need enough access to the type
to write useful operators for it. Which is not an issue too much at the
C-code level but it sure is at SQL level.
So this seems to me to be a nice conceptual idea but it's still not
clear that it works well in practice.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
