Re: Enum proposal / design - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Stark
Subject Re: Enum proposal / design
Date
Msg-id 87ejvfybll.fsf@stark.xeocode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Enum proposal / design  ("Tom Dunstan" <pgsql@tomd.cc>)
Responses Re: Enum proposal / design
List pgsql-hackers
"Tom Dunstan" <pgsql@tomd.cc> writes:

> I didn't really want to go down that path in this thread
> since it would turn what should be a fairly non-intrusive
> patch to add a new type into a big thing, and I really just
> wanted to get enums in. :) I tend to think of it the other
> way around from how you put it: if a general solution to
> that problem can be found which does fall afoul of the
> security issues that were the reason for multi-argument
> output functions to be killed off in the first place, then
> great, and enums can directly benefit.

True. Perhaps it's reasonable to use a 8-byte representation in the name of
getting the user-visible feature in. Knowing that the fundamental problem will
eventually be solved and the implementation can eventually be improved
transparently to use 1 to 4 byte storage.

-- 
greg



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Böszörményi Zoltán
Date:
Subject: Question about GENERATED/IDENTITY
Next
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: An Idea for planner hints