Re: Bit strings - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Bit strings
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.30.0101192324390.1322-100000@peter.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Bit strings  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Bit strings
Re: Bit strings
List pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian writes:

> Any idea where we are on this?

> > Bit and hexstring literals are not handled in a reasonable fashion;

Bit string literals are handled correctly, although it occurred to me that
perhaps

#define IsA_Value(t) \        (IsA(t, Integer) || IsA(t, Float) || IsA(t, String))

should be augmented with BitString.  Can someone advise?

Hex literals are still not handled correctly.

> > SQL92 sez we need a position() function for bitstrings.

We have one now.

> > Need a regression test for bit types.

We have one now.

> > scalarltsel() and friends need to cope with bit/varbit types in
> > order to make good use of indexes on bitstrings.

Not done.

> > pg_dump does not handle BIT/VARBIT lengths properly (pjw may have
> > fixed this by now).

Works fine for me.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut      peter_e@gmx.net       http://yi.org/peter-e/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ian Lance Taylor
Date:
Subject: Re: AW: AW: AW: Re: tinterval - operator problems on AIX
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Bit strings