Re: single bit integer (TINYINT) revisited for 8.5

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Kevin Grittner
Тема Re: single bit integer (TINYINT) revisited for 8.5
Дата
Msg-id 4A4B3D4E02000025000281D4@gw.wicourts.gov
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на single bit integer (TINYINT) revisited for 8.5  (Caleb Cushing <xenoterracide@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Caleb Cushing <xenoterracide@gmail.com> wrote: 
> most (if not all?) of posgresql's major competitor's (mysql, sql
> server, db2, etc) support a single bit integer datatype.
> A couple of times I've been told "you don't need tinyint, use
> boolean" which is not true, several projects I've worked on I've
> needed and integer field that supports number within a small range
> 0-5 1-10 1-100 or something similar.
I think you mean byte where you've said bit.  Boolean would be
adequate for a single bit, and I haven't (so far) seen any database
which supports both a single-bit type and a boolean.  Many databases
support a TINYINT type as a single-byte value, although I'm not sure
there's consistency on whether that's a signed or unsigned value.
-Kevin


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Josh Berkus
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: 8.5 development schedule
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: 8.5 development schedule