> On Thu, Jan 20, 2000 at 05:18:36PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > The standard doesn't provide for specifically unsigned types, so I do not
> > > believe anyone would want to go through that trouble. Sorry.
> >
> > Actually, oid data type is an unsigned int4. If it does not behave that
> >
On Thu, Jan 20, 2000 at 05:18:36PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > The standard doesn't provide for specifically unsigned types, so I do not
> > believe anyone would want to go through that trouble. Sorry.
>
> Actually, oid data type is an unsigned int4. If it does not behave that
> way, it is a
[Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...]
> The standard doesn't provide for specifically unsigned types, so I do not
> believe anyone would want to go through that trouble. Sorry.
Actually, oid data type is an unsigned int4. If it does not behave that
way, it is a bug.
--
Bruc
The standard doesn't provide for specifically unsigned types, so I do not
believe anyone would want to go through that trouble. Sorry.
On 2000-01-19, Martin Neumann mentioned:
> Are there any plans to implement unsigned datatypes like uint4 and
> uint8?
>
> In many cases I don't need the signed
Are there any plans to implement unsigned datatypes like uint4 and
uint8?
In many cases I don't need the signed int4 numbers, but I would be happy
to have a larger range without using the twice as large int8 type.
--
Martin Neumann, Welkenrather Str. 118c, 52074 Aachen, Germany
[EMAIL PROTECTED
