Re: Efficient Boolean Storage - Mailing list pgsql-general

From SZUCS Gábor
Subject Re: Efficient Boolean Storage
Date
Msg-id 009401c29bca$2e337ae0$0a03a8c0@fejleszt2
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Efficient Boolean Storage  (Csaba Nagy <nagy@domeus.de>)
List pgsql-general
I think it is because of the MSB order. Would it be implemented as LSB, I'm
sure the high byte would be the one to be padded :)

G.
--
while (!asleep()) sheep++;

---------------------------- cut here ------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jean-Luc Lachance" <jllachan@nsd.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 7:39 PM


> It is unintuitive to me that the low byte be padded.  Shouldn't it be
> the high byte?
>
> JLL
>
> Joe Conway wrote:
> >    *              bitdata   -- bit string, most significant byte first



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Terry Yapt
Date:
Subject: passwords in pg_shadow (duplicate).
Next
From: "Andrew J. Kopciuch"
Date:
Subject: Re: Functions just dont want to work! [hard]