Re: smallserial / serial2
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Mike Pultz <mike@mikepultz.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-04-25T13:07:14Z
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 Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Mike Pultz <mike@mikepultz.com> wrote: > And since serial4 and serial8 are simply pseudo-types- effectively there for > convenience, I’d argue that it should simply be there for completeness- just > because it may be less used, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be convenient? Right now, smallint is a bit like an unwanted stepchild in the PostgreSQL type system. In addition to the problem you hit here, there are various situations where using smallint requires casts in cases where int4 or int8 would not. Ken Rosensteel even talked about this being an obstacle to Oracle to PostgreSQL migrations, in his talk at PG East (see his slides for details). Generally, I think this is a bad thing. We should be trying to put all types on equal footing, rather than artificially privilege some over others. Unfortunately, this is easier said than done, but I don't think that's a reason to give up trying. So a tentative +1 from me on supporting this. You might want to review: http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Submitting_a_Patch -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company