From: | Joseph Shraibman <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Re: new type proposal |
Date: | 2001-02-06 23:09:54 |
Message-ID: | 3A808442.80764ECE@selectacast.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Alex Pilosov wrote:
>
> On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Dan Wilson wrote:
>
> > What would this do that would be non-standard? Does the SERIAL datatype add
> > something that is not standard? No... it just allows for an easy way to
> > implement something that is standard. The SERIAL "type" isn't really a
> > datatype, it's just a keyword that allows you to automatically specify an
> > int4 column with a related sequence and default. I don't see why the same
> > thing couldn't be done with TIMESTAMP!
> Such way the madnesssH^H^H^Hmysql lies ;)
>
> I firmly believe that people who need that feature should implement it
> themselves via triggers, and rest of us shouldn't suffer from the code
> bloat resulting to support this.
I noticed that people are ignoring the time created part of my
proposal. How can a read only field be implemented? A trigger that
causes and error if that field is updated?
--
Joseph Shraibman
jks(at)selectacast(dot)net
Increase signal to noise ratio. http://www.targabot.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Martin A. Marques | 2001-02-06 23:21:11 | Re: Using 7.0.3 - Time to upgrade to 7.1 yet? |
Previous Message | Martin A. Marques | 2001-02-06 23:07:15 | Re: Re: new type proposal |