On Fri, 15 Sep 2006, Dave Page wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
> > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of
> > Ricardo Malafaia
> > Sent: 15 September 2006 16:35
> > To: Andrew Dunstan
> > Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] polite request about syntax
> >
> > my complaint is that, like i said, "timestamp with time zone" is no
> > good substitute for a simple "datetime". Here, someone suggested a
> > CREATE DOMAIN to create an alias for it. Why isn't it provided there
> > out-of-the-box by default? So you have the SQL standard timestamp and
> > the industry standard datetime.
>
> Because adding everybody's idea of industry-standard typenames, function
> name, operators etc will lead to bloated system catalogs and insanity
> for people trying to understand what differences between objects there
> may or may not be.
>
> We follow the SQL standards. If you need to provide compatibility types
> and functions to migrate from another product, then unlike many others
> we provide the capability for you to add them yourself.
I hate to comment on what is shaping up to be a bit of a tinderbox of a
thread, but I can't help myself.
When I was first dealing with postgres, I found it extremely annoying that
I had to type out "double precision" rather than just "double" since every
sane programming language (as well as Java) uses double. I eventually
figured out that it was because double precision is the standard name, but
I don't like to type and although I know I could use float8, I am used to
typing double.
I have found the same thing with the type "timestamp without time zone".
The verbosity of type names seems rather extreme. But it is just not
important enough to warrant me creating a domain or anything to do
anything about it, it just slightly irks me every time I have to type
them.
I have probably now written more on this than it deserves :)
--
Fertility is hereditary. If your parents didn't have any children,
neither will you.
