Re: Distinct types - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Distinct types
Date
Msg-id 3763.1227911708@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Distinct types  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> On Friday 28 November 2008 18:49:17 Tom Lane wrote:
>> The problem I see with distinct types is that the typing is *too*
>> strong --- the datatype has in fact got no usable operations whatever.

> You are supposed to define your own.  It's a new type after all.  You only 
> borrow the representation from an existing one.

And the I/O functions ... and you still need enough access to the type
to write useful operators for it.  Which is not an issue too much at the
C-code level but it sure is at SQL level.

So this seems to me to be a nice conceptual idea but it's still not
clear that it works well in practice.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Distinct types
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: HEAD build failure on win32 mingw