Simon Riggs writes:
> It might be possible to make BOOLEAN NOT NULL use the null bit to
> represent the actual data value and then have the column use no
> additional bytes, except when we don't store the null bitmap at all.
> Just needs people to make it happen cleanly, if that's possible.
I rea
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 12:03 +0100, Sam Mason wrote:
> > However, I see that a boolean takes up 1
> > byte of storage, which is 8 bits. Is this due to the fact that the value
> > can be null?
>
> I believe it's more to do with the fact that if you add a boolean column
> and then subsequently an
2009/10/1 Sam Mason
>
> bool_or and bool_and are aggregates that work over boolean data types.
>
>
Ah yes, that makes total sense! I knew max wouldn't be logical in such as
case, but couldn't think of the alternative. Thanks!
>
> I believe it's more to do with the fact that if you add a boole
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 11:37:40AM +0100, Thom Brown wrote:
> I've read the PostgreSQL documentation page on the boolean datatype (
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/datatype-boolean.html) to find out
> what PostgreSQL's definition of a boolean is, as I believe it is distinctive
> from a
Hi,
I've read the PostgreSQL documentation page on the boolean datatype (
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/datatype-boolean.html) to find out
what PostgreSQL's definition of a boolean is, as I believe it is distinctive
from a bit(1) datatype (as you can't max() a boolean.. not sure what a
