Re: Distinct types
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Distinct types |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 26955.1227890957@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Distinct types (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Distinct types
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: > On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 11:20 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> If it's going to take a significant amount of work then I think someone >> ought to provide an actual justification why it's worth the work. > Few thoughts: > * Domains don't work very well in conjunction with arrays. But distinct types would somehow work better? > * Strong typing is preferable in complex applications to avoid errors > like sum(ordinal_column). Most developers use this all the time in their > 3GL code but cannot use it in SQL. The problem I see with distinct types is that the typing is *too* strong --- the datatype has in fact got no usable operations whatever. > * Allows migration of code easier from places that use strange sounding > datatypes that can be mapped easily to existing datatypes. Again, distinct types do *not* provide a "mapping to existing types", because none of the operations carry along. Domains would be more nearly what you want for that. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: