Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane writes: >> Given that we now need order-of-thirty possible field types, do you feel >> uncomfortable with a single-byte field identifier in the FE/BE protocol?
> There's a possible solution: SQL99 part 3 defines numerical codes for > each of these fields (table 12/section 5.14). The codes are between > around 0 and 40. Hmm. I can't see any advantage to these over assigning our own codes; ours would have at least *some* mnemonic value, rather than being chosen completely at random ... regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html