Re: [HACKERS] UNICODE characters vs. BINARY - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Don Baccus
Subject Re: [HACKERS] UNICODE characters vs. BINARY
Date
Msg-id 3.0.1.32.19991214105437.010891c0@mail.pacifier.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] UNICODE characters vs. BINARY  (Gunther Schadow <gunther@aurora.rg.iupui.edu>)
List pgsql-hackers
At 01:34 PM 12/14/99 -0500, Gunther Schadow wrote:
>so BIGINT (as a synonym for INT8 is not supported). Is 
>BIGINT not a standard SQL92 or de Facto?

I've got Date's book sitting here, and it says that integer
and smallint are standard, with int being a standard
abbreviation for integer.  So apparently bigint is
a common additional type, not standard SQL92.



- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza@pacifier.com> Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest Rare Bird Alert
Serviceand other goodies at http://donb.photo.net.
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck)
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Volunteer: Large Tuples / Tuple chaining
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Arrays