| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "George Pavlov" <gpavlov(at)mynewplace(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: datatype preceded by underscore creates array |
| Date: | 2006-10-16 23:47:35 |
| Message-ID: | 7685.1161042455@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"George Pavlov" <gpavlov(at)mynewplace(dot)com> writes:
> yes, but int8 is a clearly documented while preceding certain "magic"
> datatype names with underscores is not. i really don't have much of a
> problem with this, but little things like this contribute to people
> coming from other DBMSs developing opinions that "this open-source stuff
> does weird, undocumented things" (not that commercial DBMSs don't do
> weird stuff :).
Undocumented? Read the CREATE TYPE manual page.
I'll agree it's pretty ugly, but it's not worth changing ... especially
since a change would break some legacy application code.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-10-16 23:51:17 | Re: pg_locks: who is locking ? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-10-16 23:38:08 | Re: RES: RES: Dates rejected |