| From: | Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org |
| Cc: | peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: CREATE CONVERSION |
| Date: | 2002-07-09 05:01:10 |
| Message-ID: | 20020709.140110.27798256.t-ishii@sra.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > I've been think this for a while too. What about collation? If we add
> > new chaset A and B, and each has 10 collations then we are going to
> > have 20 new types? That seems overkill to me.
>
> Well, afaict all of the operations we would ask of a type we will be
> required to provide for character sets and collations. So ordering,
> conversions, operators, index methods, etc etc are all required. It
> *does* seem like a lot of work, but the type system is specifically
> designed to do exactly this. Lifting those capabilities out of the type
> system only to reimplement them elsewhere seems all trouble with no
> upside.
If so, what about the "coercibility" property?
The standard defines four distinct coercibility properties. So in
above my example, actually you are going to define 80 new types?
(also a collation could be either "PAD SPACE" or "NO PAD". So you
might have 160 new types).
--
Tatsuo Ishii
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2002-07-09 05:03:30 | Re: Proposal: CREATE CONVERSION |
| Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2002-07-09 04:20:13 | More fun with BETWEEN |