| From: | Vincent Veyron <vv(dot)lists(at)wanadoo(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: An amusing MySQL weakness--not! |
| Date: | 2011-06-27 03:04:27 |
| Message-ID: | 1309143867.2381.33.camel@asus-1001PX.home |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Le dimanche 26 juin 2011 à 16:41 +0200, Pavel Stehule a écrit :
> everywhere, where you require readability. For me a FALSE is more
> readable than 1 <> 0 or TRUE instead 1 = 1
>
Actually, in Perl it's just 0 for false and 1 for true, so it's very
readable if you're used to it.
> >
> > I'm asking this because I frequently wonder what is best for my use; I
> > normally query postgres via Perl modules, which don't care about boolean
> > (the driver converts t/f to 0/1), but I like to tune my fields properly.
> >
>
> sure, it depends on fact if outer environment knows or doesn't know a
> boolean datatype.
>
In that case, I was really wondering from a data modeling standpoint.
Stephen's point seems good (only two values + null).
--
Vincent Veyron
http://marica.fr/
Logiciel de gestion des sinistres et des contentieux pour le service juridique
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Johnston | 2011-06-27 03:39:43 | Re: to_timestamp() and timestamp without time zone |
| Previous Message | Vincent Veyron | 2011-06-27 02:45:40 | Re: An amusing MySQL weakness--not! |