Re: smallserial / serial2
Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>
From: Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>
To: Brar Piening <brar@gmx.de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-06-08T23:01:40Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Add a variant expected-output file for the sequence regression test, to cover
- bb3f839bfcb3 8.4.0 cited
On Jun 8, 2011, at 5:36 PM, Brar Piening wrote: > Pros > Mike Pultz (patch author): "since serial4 and serial8 are simply pseudo-types- effectively there for convenience, I’d argue that it should simply be there for completeness" > Robert Haas: "We should be trying to put all types on equal footing, rather than artificially privilege some over others." > Brar Piening (me): "I'm with the above arguments. In addition I'd like to mention that other databases have it too so having it improves portability. Especially when using ORM." > Perhaps we can get some more opinions... We have some "dynamic lookup table" metacode that sets up all the infrastructure for a table that normalizes text values to a serial/int. But in many cases, it's a safe bet that we would never need more than 32k (or at worst, 64k) values. Right now it would be difficult to benefit from the 2 byte savings, but if Postgres was ever able to order fields on disk in the most efficient possible format (something we're willing to sponsor, hint hint ;) then this would be beneficial for us. -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect jim@nasby.net 512.569.9461 (cell) http://jim.nasby.net