David Fetter writes:
> On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 10:07:29PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> What would be the point?
> Removing the legacy "char" type, per original post. :)
Removing it is the wrong solution.
The idea of renaming it to char1 might be an appropriate balance of pain
versus benefit.
On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 10:07:29PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from David Fetter's message of lun sep 05 21:05:10 -0300 2011:
>
> > On brief inspection, it appears that each of these would be better
> > served, at least functionally, with some kind of enumerated type.
> > Might it be w
Excerpts from David Fetter's message of lun sep 05 21:05:10 -0300 2011:
> On brief inspection, it appears that each of these would be better
> served, at least functionally, with some kind of enumerated type.
> Might it be worth trying to micro-optimize this case for a one-byte
> enum? Or maybe s
On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 07:33:09PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> David Fetter wrote:
> > > > > I am unsure on that one. We have many 'char' mentions in
> > > > > catalog.sgml, and I don't see any of them shown as '"char"'.
> > > > > (Wow, we should have just called this type char1, but I think
> >
David Fetter wrote:
> > > > I am unsure on that one. We have many 'char' mentions in
> > > > catalog.sgml, and I don't see any of them shown as '"char"'.
> > > > (Wow, we should have just called this type char1, but I think
> > > > that name came from Berkeley!) The big problem is that the
> > > >
On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 02:21:46PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Removing CC to pg-docs so that Robert reads it.
> >
> > Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of vie mar 11 08:13:20 -0300 2011:
> > > Kevin Grittner wrote:
> >
> > > > relpersistence should be "char", not
Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of lun sep 05 15:21:46 -0300 2011:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Discussed the idea a bit on IM with Bruce, but couldn't find any really
> > good alternative. Idea floated so far:
> >
> > * byte (seems pretty decent to me)
> > * octet (though maybe people woul
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Removing CC to pg-docs so that Robert reads it.
>
> Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of vie mar 11 08:13:20 -0300 2011:
> > Kevin Grittner wrote:
>
> > > relpersistence should be "char", not char.
> > > Oddly enough, there is a difference.
> >
> > I am unsure on that
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of vie mar 11 13:01:06 -0300 2011:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of vie mar 11 12:40:50 -0300 2011:
> >> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> >>> One idea is to rename the type to something else. We could keep "char"
> >>> as an alias for back
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of vie mar 11 12:40:50 -0300 2011:
>> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>>> One idea is to rename the type to something else. We could keep "char"
>>> as an alias for backwards compatibility, but use the new name in system
>>> catalogs, and document
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of vie mar 11 12:40:50 -0300 2011:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > One idea is to rename the type to something else. We could keep "char"
> > as an alias for backwards compatibility, but use the new name in system
> > catalogs, and document it as the main name of the
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> One idea is to rename the type to something else. We could keep "char"
> as an alias for backwards compatibility, but use the new name in system
> catalogs, and document it as the main name of the type.
We don't have type aliases...
regards, tom
Removing CC to pg-docs so that Robert reads it.
Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of vie mar 11 08:13:20 -0300 2011:
> Kevin Grittner wrote:
> > relpersistence should be "char", not char.
> > Oddly enough, there is a difference.
>
> I am unsure on that one. We have many 'char' mentions in c
Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Thom Brown wrote:
>
> > I've attached a couple minor fixes to the docs. One relating to
> > SECURITY LABEL and the other for pg_class.relpersistence
>
> relpersistence should be "char", not char.
> Oddly enough, there is a difference.
I am unsure on that one. We have
On 19 January 2011 21:10, Tom Lane wrote:
> Thom Brown writes:
>> I've attached a couple minor fixes to the docs. One relating to
>> SECURITY LABEL and the other for pg_class.relpersistence
>
> Applied, thanks.
Cheers Mr Lane.
--
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Regis
Thom Brown writes:
> I've attached a couple minor fixes to the docs. One relating to
> SECURITY LABEL and the other for pg_class.relpersistence
Applied, thanks.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to y
Thom Brown wrote:
> relkind in the same table is the same type, but isn't displayed as
> "char" in the docs, and the same applies to many other system
tables.
> They would need changing too then.
>
> Examples are:
>
> pg_type.typtype
> pg_proc.provolatile
> pg_attribute.attstorage
That's a g
On 19 January 2011 18:11, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Thom Brown wrote:
>
>> I've attached a couple minor fixes to the docs. One relating to
>> SECURITY LABEL and the other for pg_class.relpersistence
>
> relpersistence should be "char", not char.
> Oddly enough, there is a difference.
>
> -Kevin
r
Thom Brown wrote:
> I've attached a couple minor fixes to the docs. One relating to
> SECURITY LABEL and the other for pg_class.relpersistence
relpersistence should be "char", not char.
Oddly enough, there is a difference.
-Kevin
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postg
Hi,
I've attached a couple minor fixes to the docs. One relating to
SECURITY LABEL and the other for pg_class.relpersistence
--
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #516935
doc_fixes.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing
20 matches
Mail list logo
