Re: Couple document fixes
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Kevin Grittner <kevin.grittner@wicourts.gov>, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-09-06T15:19:45Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> writes: > On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 10:07:29PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> What would be the point? > Removing the legacy "char" type, per original post. :) Removing it is the wrong solution. The idea of renaming it to char1 might be an appropriate balance of pain versus benefit. Or perhaps not; I'd want to see a proposed patch before committing to doing anything here. > We've made changes as big on aesthetic grounds before, and if the > change results in an enum type optimized for space efficiency, that's > all to the good. That's a pipe dream. You can't use enums in catalogs that underlie the enum implementation. Possibly you could kluge something so that there are phony entries in pg_enum reflecting the hard-wired values that the C code uses, but I entirely fail to see any point in such a thing. regards, tom lane