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