Re: bit strings - anyone working on them?

From: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, "PostgreSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: bit strings - anyone working on them?
Date: 2003-04-23 15:34:18
Message-ID: 5.1.0.14.0.20030424013121.05bab018@mail.rhyme.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At 11:29 AM 23/04/2003 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Cast( Cast(42 as bit(32)) as bit(10))
>yield? Unless you make the second cast truncate at the left, you'll get
>ten zero bits out of this.

I'm still missing the point, I think.

Cast(42 as bit(32)) => 01010100000000000000000000000000

Cast(B'01010100000000000000000000000000' as bit(10)) => '0101010000'

----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner | __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498) | /(@) ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81 | _________ \
Fax: (+61) 03 5330 3172 | ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \|
| --________--
PGP key available upon request, | /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2003-04-23 15:37:05 Re: Are we losing momentum?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-04-23 15:29:34 Re: bit strings - anyone working on them?