[database-devel] Arrays and postgresql-simple
Jeff Davis
pgsql at j-davis.com
Sat Aug 18 20:48:16 CEST 2012
On Thu, 2012-08-16 at 19:18 -0400, Leon Smith wrote:
> Ok, I really want to get the TypeInfo structure more or less
> "correct" before we release this work.
>
> After reviewing the documentation regarding the pg_type table, I
> think it would be a mistake to "mandate" an interpretation of the
> table in the new TypeInfo structure, as my suggested TypeInfo would
> do. Rather, I think it would be better to represent (part of) the
> pg_type table faithfully, closer to what Bas originally did.
> However, I do think it should be a properly recursive type.
It doesn't look like TypeInfo is returned to users, so I don't see a
major problem with using a more convenient representation if we find
one. What am I missing?
> So my new suggestion for the TypeInfo structure is this:
>
> data TypeInfo = TypeInfo
> { typoid :: {-# UNPACK #-} !PQ.Oid
> , typcategory :: {-# UNPACK #-} !Char
> , typdelim :: {-# UNPACK #-} !Char
> , typname :: !ByteString
> , typelem :: Maybe TypeInfo
> }
>
We'll be omitting some information there, notably the subtypes for range
types and the subtypes for composite types. I assume that you intend to
add those organically as the need arises (e.g. keep adding in more parts
of the PG catalogs)?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
More information about the database-devel
mailing list