int1?

[CSN]

Is there any date type that can be used for 0-255
values? Like an "int1" or byte column.

CSN

_______________ _______________ ____
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

[Shridhar Daithankar]

CSN wrote:

Is there any date type that can be used for 0-255
values? Like an "int1" or byte column.

You can use a smallint with constraint.

HTH
Shridhar
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend

[Ron Johnson]

On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 02:16, CSN wrote:

Is there any date type that can be used for 0-255
values? Like an "int1" or byte column.

An int2 with a constraint on it.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Johnson, Jr. ro***********@c ox.net
Jefferson, LA USA

"Fear the Penguin!!"
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddres sHere" to ma*******@postg resql.org)

[Sean Chittenden]

> Is there any date type that can be used for 0-255

values? Like an "int1" or byte column.

A SMALLINT is two bytes on disk, use "char" instead. This is a hidden
goodie in PostgreSQL and one that I wish was exposed via a more
conventional syntax (*hint hint*).

http://developer.postgresql.org/docs...-SPECIAL-TABLE

-sc

--
Sean Chittenden

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

[Ron Johnson]

On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 03:19, Sean Chittenden wrote:

Is there any date type that can be used for 0-255
values? Like an "int1" or byte column.

A SMALLINT is two bytes on disk, use "char" instead. This is a hidden
goodie in PostgreSQL and one that I wish was exposed via a more
conventional syntax (*hint hint*).

http://developer.postgresql.org/docs...-SPECIAL-TABLE

Wouldn't that be, though, a signed byte? The OP wants unsigned.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Johnson, Jr. ro***********@c ox.net
Jefferson, LA USA

The purpose of the military isn't to pay your college tuition or
give you a little extra income; it's to "kill people and break
things".
Surprisingly, not everyone understands that.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match

[Karsten Hilbert]

> http://developer.postgresql.org/docs...-SPECIAL-TABLE
Is it unsafe practice to use the datatype "name" for
attributes that hold table or column names etc ?

Karsten
--
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match

[Stephan Szabo]

On Thu, 9 Oct 2003, Sean Chittenden wrote:

Is there any date type that can be used for 0-255
values? Like an "int1" or byte column.
A SMALLINT is two bytes on disk, use "char" instead. This is a hidden

However "char" has some serious deficiencies IIRC, such as the fact that
there's no int<->"char" casts and it's standard I/O format is characters.
You can use ascii and chr to get around some of that, but it's ugly.
goodie in PostgreSQL and one that I wish was exposed via a more
conventional syntax (*hint hint*).

If we were going to do that I think we'd be better off making a new type
and leaving "char" alone.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to ma*******@postg resql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

[Sean Chittenden]

> > > Is there any date type that can be used for 0-255 values? Like

an "int1" or byte column.
A SMALLINT is two bytes on disk, use "char" instead. This is a hidden

However "char" has some serious deficiencies IIRC, such as the fact
that there's no int<->"char" casts and it's standard I/O format is
characters. You can use ascii and chr to get around some of that,
but it's ugly.

*nods* I have explicit casts everywhere when dealing with "char" and
it's far from being elegant or clean.

goodie in PostgreSQL and one that I wish was exposed via a more
conventional syntax (*hint hint*).

If we were going to do that I think we'd be better off making a new
type and leaving "char" alone.

You won't hear any disagreements from me on this one. I've
sufficiently abused "char" as a 1 byte storage field and would love to
see an int1 or tinyint datatype added to cover this situation. -sc

--
Sean Chittenden

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddres sHere" to ma*******@postg resql.org)

[Ron Johnson]

On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 12:54, Sean Chittenden wrote:

> Is there any date type that can be used for 0-255 values? Like
> an "int1" or byte column.

A SMALLINT is two bytes on disk, use "char" instead. This is a hidden

However "char" has some serious deficiencies IIRC, such as the fact
that there's no int<->"char" casts and it's standard I/O format is
characters. You can use ascii and chr to get around some of that,
but it's ugly.

*nods* I have explicit casts everywhere when dealing with "char" and
it's far from being elegant or clean.

goodie in PostgreSQL and one that I wish was exposed via a more
conventional syntax (*hint hint*).

If we were going to do that I think we'd be better off making a new
type and leaving "char" alone.

You won't hear any disagreements from me on this one. I've
sufficiently abused "char" as a 1 byte storage field and would love to
see an int1 or tinyint datatype added to cover this situation. -sc

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.3/s...atedomain.html
CREATE DOMAIN domainname [AS] data_type
[ DEFAULT default_expr ]
[ constraint [, ... ] ]

where constraint is:

[ CONSTRAINT constraint_name ]
{ NOT NULL | NULL }

test1=# create domain d_tinyint as smallint constraint chk_tinyint CHECK (smallint between 0 and 255);
ERROR: DefineDomain: CHECK Constraints not supported

So, how would I create a domain that limits a smallint?

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Johnson, Jr. ro***********@c ox.net
Jefferson, LA USA

"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer
arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
Bertrand Meyer
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 14:28:57 -0500,
Ron Johnson <ro***********@ cox.net> wrote:

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.3/s...atedomain.html
CREATE DOMAIN domainname [AS] data_type
[ DEFAULT default_expr ]
[ constraint [, ... ] ]

where constraint is:

[ CONSTRAINT constraint_name ]
{ NOT NULL | NULL }

test1=# create domain d_tinyint as smallint constraint chk_tinyint CHECK (smallint between 0 and 255);
ERROR: DefineDomain: CHECK Constraints not supported

So, how would I create a domain that limits a smallint?

You need to use 7.4. In 7.3 you couldn't use check constraints with domains.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster