| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joseph Adams <joeyadams3(dot)14159(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Working with PostgreSQL enums in C code |
| Date: | 2010-06-08 00:35:47 |
| Message-ID: | 4C0D9063.9070609@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Joseph Adams wrote:
>
> By the way, just curious: why can't the internal representation of an
> enum just be an INT starting from 0 by default, like in C? That would
> make a heck of a lot more sense, in my opinion. It might also allow
> users to do things like this in the future:
>
>
>
Please review the debates over the internal representation from several
years ago when enums were implemented. Essentially the difficulty is
that the output function needs to get nothing more than the value
itself, and that means the representation needs to carry with it some
information about *which* enum set it is in.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2010-06-08 00:46:27 | Re: [PATCH] Fix leaky VIEWs for RLS |
| Previous Message | Takahiro Itagaki | 2010-06-08 00:30:07 | Re: pgstatindex still throws ERROR: value "3220078592" is out of range for type integer |