Re: DOMAIN/composite TYPE vs. base TYPE - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Ron
Subject Re: DOMAIN/composite TYPE vs. base TYPE
Date
Msg-id ca40d2ad-eb1a-7d64-6911-366550336974@gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: DOMAIN/composite TYPE vs. base TYPE  (Joe Abbate <jma@freedomcircle.com>)
List pgsql-general
On 9/28/20 4:31 PM, Joe Abbate wrote:
Hello Rob,

On 28/9/20 17:17, Rob Sargent wrote:
just record all three fields (day, month, year) with nulls and do the to-date as needed.

That is not sufficient.  An earlier implementation had something like a CHAR(8) to record YYYYMMDD, but how can you indicate, for example, an issue date of a bimonthly magazine, say July-Aug 2020?  We can store 2020-07-01 in the DATE attribute, but we need another attribute to indicate it's really two months.  Also, by storing three separate columns, you loose the beauty of the PG DATE abstraction.

The Gramps genealogy program has figured it out; maybe it's source code can lend you some clues.

--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Joe Abbate
Date:
Subject: Re: DOMAIN/composite TYPE vs. base TYPE
Next
From: "Gavan Schneider"
Date:
Subject: Re: DOMAIN/composite TYPE vs. base TYPE