| From: | Reece Hart <reece(at)harts(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Darren Duncan <darren(at)darrenduncan(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: equivalent of mysql's SET type? |
| Date: | 2011-03-09 04:48:44 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTinWeoBE+dnNxTWqqw0KA+ksRQo2P5hZ6PK7x43F@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Darren Duncan <darren(at)darrenduncan(dot)net>wrote:
> Try starting with an enum type to define the possible values:
>
> CREATE TYPE Consequence_Type
> AS ENUM ('ESSENTIAL_SPLICE_SITE','STOP_GAINED',
> 'STOP_LOST','COMPLEX_INDEL','SPLICE_SITE');
>
> ... and then you could try using "ARRAY OF Consequence_Type" or some such.
>
Arrays occurred to me, but they don't give a set (i.e., a consequence type
can appear more than once) unless I write the code to dedupe the array.
However, if I were going to put that much effort into it, I might as well
represent the set directly and obviate the dedupe. Or, am I missing
something from your suggestion?
-Reece
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Reece Hart | 2011-03-09 04:54:52 | Re: equivalent of mysql's SET type? |
| Previous Message | Josh Kupershmidt | 2011-03-09 04:34:35 | Re: Using bytea field... |