Re: FW: Male/female - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Karsten Hilbert
Subject Re: FW: Male/female
Date
Msg-id 20061210163819.GC4930@merkur.hilbert.loc
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: FW: Male/female  (Alban Hertroys <alban@magproductions.nl>)
Responses Re: FW: Male/female  ("H.J. Sanders" <hjs@rmax.nl>)
List pgsql-general
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 04:50:16PM +0100, Alban Hertroys wrote:

> Why not use unicode symbols 0x2640 and 0x2642?
A clever idea, however, it does not cover

transsexual, female phenotype
transsexual, male phenotype
hermaphrodite, intersexual phenotype

which we (GNUmed, that is) need to support in a medical
database.

In fact, most (all?) of the approaches I have seen in this
thread lack that. Using bool would even preclude extension
of the constraint in that direction if it were ever needed.
So, one is better of with, say, char(2) or something
similar.

I would also suggest using a *coded* gender, not "male",
"female" strings which will make gender-based calculations a
lot easier down the road.

Karsten
--
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD  4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Karsten Hilbert
Date:
Subject: inheritance and index use (similar to UNION ALL)
Next
From: "H.J. Sanders"
Date:
Subject: Re: FW: Male/female