Le lundi 27 juin 2011 à 12:11 +0200, Leif Biberg Kristensen a écrit :
> PHP has its own Boolean values TRUE/FALSE, but reads Postgresql
> Booleans as
> 't'/'f'. You always have to rely on kludgy konstructs like
>
> if ($pg_bool == 't') then
> $my_bool = TRUE;
> elseif ($pg_bool == 'f') then
>
On Sunday 26. June 2011 16.11.06 Vincent Veyron wrote:
> Le dimanche 26 juin 2011 à 00:05 -0700, Darren Duncan a écrit :
> > Michael Nolan wrote:
> >
> > Having real BOOLEAN is just one of the reasons I like Postgres the most.
>
> Would you mind giving an example of where a boolean field would be
Στις Sunday 26 June 2011 17:11:06 ο/η Vincent Veyron έγραψε:
> Le dimanche 26 juin 2011 � 00:05 -0700, Darren Duncan a �crit :
> > Michael Nolan wrote:
>
> > Having real BOOLEAN is just one of the reasons I like Postgres the most.
> >
>
> Would you mind giving an example of where a boolean field
Le dimanche 26 juin 2011 à 16:41 +0200, Pavel Stehule a écrit :
> everywhere, where you require readability. For me a FALSE is more
> readable than 1 <> 0 or TRUE instead 1 = 1
>
Actually, in Perl it's just 0 for false and 1 for true, so it's very
readable if you're used to it.
> >
> > I'm ask
Le dimanche 26 juin 2011 à 12:05 -0400, Stephen Frost a écrit :
> > (the driver converts t/f to 0/1), but I like to tune my fields properly.
>
> Yes, which is pretty horrible of it, imo.
>
There is an option to turn it off and get the characters t/f returned
(pg_bool_tf)
--
Vincent Veyron
htt
On 26/06/11 16:44, Michael Nolan wrote:
Earlier today I was working on a MySQL database (not by choice, I
assure you),
and I typed a statement like this:
Update tablexyz set field1 = '15' where field2 - 20;
The '-' was supposed to be an equal sign, but MySQL executed it
anyway. (Field2 is an
This message has been digitally signed by the sender.
Re___GENERAL__An_amusing_MySQL_weakness__not_.eml
Description: Binary data
Hi-Tech Gears Ltd, Gurgaon, India
Sent using "PostMaster" by QuantumLink Communications
Get your free
* Vincent Veyron (vv.li...@wanadoo.fr) wrote:
> Would you mind giving an example of where a boolean field would be a win
> over an integer one?
Where you only ever want 2 (or perhaps 2+NULL) values allowed for the
column. It's about domain, consistency, etc, primairly. That said,
don't we implem
hello
2011/6/26 Vincent Veyron :
> Le dimanche 26 juin 2011 à 00:05 -0700, Darren Duncan a écrit :
>> Michael Nolan wrote:
>
>> Having real BOOLEAN is just one of the reasons I like Postgres the most.
>>
>
> Would you mind giving an example of where a boolean field would be a win
> over an integer
Le dimanche 26 juin 2011 à 00:05 -0700, Darren Duncan a écrit :
> Michael Nolan wrote:
> Having real BOOLEAN is just one of the reasons I like Postgres the most.
>
Would you mind giving an example of where a boolean field would be a win
over an integer one?
I'm asking this because I frequently
Michael Nolan wrote:
Earlier today I was working on a MySQL database (not by choice, I assure
you),
and I typed a statement like this:
Update tablexyz set field1 = '15' where field2 - 20;
The '-' was supposed to be an equal sign, but MySQL executed it anyway.
(Field2 is an integer.)
I was
> "Michael" == Michael Nolan writes:
Michael> Earlier today I was working on a MySQL database (not by choice, I
assure
Michael> you),
Friends don't let friends use MySQL.
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Sma
Earlier today I was working on a MySQL database (not by choice, I assure
you),
and I typed a statement like this:
Update tablexyz set field1 = '15' where field2 - 20;
The '-' was supposed to be an equal sign, but MySQL executed it anyway.
(Field2 is an integer.)
I was not amused.
PostgreSQL rep
13 matches
Mail list logo
