Re: extensible enum types - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David E. Wheeler
Subject Re: extensible enum types
Date
Msg-id 28C0DDCD-59F6-476E-8769-BE68E4B70BED@kineticode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: extensible enum types  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: extensible enum types  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Jun 18, 2010, at 9:34 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:

> I'd be perfectly happy to hear a reasonable alternative. Assuming we use some integer representation, given two
labelsrepresented by n and n+1, we can't add a label between them without rewriting the tables that use the type,
whetherit's my representation scheme or some other. Maybe we could have a FORCE option which would rewrite if
necessary.

People would likely always use it.

Why not use a decimal number?

Best,

David

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "David E. Wheeler"
Date:
Subject: Re: extensible enum types
Next
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: extensible enum types