Re: [GENERAL] Avoiding repeating simple field definitions - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Adrian Klaver
Subject Re: [GENERAL] Avoiding repeating simple field definitions
Date
Msg-id f0124d66-3de4-6470-4c89-9e7deaf96a58@aklaver.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [GENERAL] Avoiding repeating simple field definitions  (Guyren Howe <guyren@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
On 02/02/2017 07:20 AM, Guyren Howe wrote:
> I saw a thing somewhere about avoiding repeating the same field
> definitions. So an app I’m working on uses an exactly 6-character sting
> as an identifier, which appears in many places.

The thing would be?

Can you show an example of the 6 character string and how it is used in
multiple places?

What is your concern?

>
> IIRC, the thing I read proposed defining a type AS IMPLICIT, but I’m not
> sure. Mainly because the docs urge caution with using AS IMPLICIT.
>
> Thoughts?


--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Guyren Howe
Date:
Subject: [GENERAL] Avoiding repeating simple field definitions
Next
From: John R Pierce
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Avoiding repeating simple field definitions