Re: Couple document fixes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Couple document fixes
Date
Msg-id 7024.1315322385@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Couple document fixes  (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> writes:
> On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 10:07:29PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> What would be the point?

> Removing the legacy "char" type, per original post. :)

Removing it is the wrong solution.

The idea of renaming it to char1 might be an appropriate balance of pain
versus benefit.  Or perhaps not; I'd want to see a proposed patch before
committing to doing anything here.

> We've made changes as big on aesthetic grounds before, and if the
> change results in an enum type optimized for space efficiency, that's
> all to the good.

That's a pipe dream.  You can't use enums in catalogs that underlie the
enum implementation.  Possibly you could kluge something so that there
are phony entries in pg_enum reflecting the hard-wired values that the C
code uses, but I entirely fail to see any point in such a thing.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: B-tree parent pointer and checkpoints
Next
From: Ants Aasma
Date:
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Clean up the #include mess a little.