Re: [GENERAL] composite type and domain

2009-05-29 Thread Scott Bailey
Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote: On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 3:37 AM, Scott Bailey wrote: Did you read the article I sent you earlier? Well, the difference here is that this way db doesn't really check anything :) you just choose path of execution, that you created prior. That's cheating :p So yes, I

Re: [GENERAL] composite type and domain

2009-05-29 Thread Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 3:37 AM, Scott Bailey wrote: > Did you read the article I sent you earlier? Well, the difference here is that this way db doesn't really check anything :) you just choose path of execution, that you created prior. That's cheating :p So yes, I read that article, but that's

Re: [GENERAL] composite type and domain

2009-05-28 Thread Scott Bailey
Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote: 2009/5/27 Scott Bailey : Who said anything about the application level? can you give an example please ? Did you read the article I sent you earlier? I'm doing almost the exact same thing you are doing save the bytea field. I create a timespan composite type t

Re: [GENERAL] composite type and domain

2009-05-28 Thread Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
2009/5/27 Scott Bailey : > Who said anything about the application level? can you give an example please ? -- GJ -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] composite type and domain

2009-05-27 Thread Scott Bailey
Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote: well, I need database to guard data, not application. Application can check things too, but database's job is to make sure data is integral. Who said anything about the application level? -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make

Re: [GENERAL] composite type and domain

2009-05-27 Thread Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
well, I need database to guard data, not application. Application can check things too, but database's job is to make sure data is integral. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] composite type and domain

2009-05-27 Thread Scott Bailey
Scott Bailey wrote: Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote: Why is it not possible to create domain on composite type ? Consider the example, I got (a bytea, b timestamp, c timestamp). Where b < c always, and both b and c have some default value, a can stay null. Now, I don't want to go berserk, and create

Re: [GENERAL] composite type and domain

2009-05-27 Thread Scott Bailey
Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote: Why is it not possible to create domain on composite type ? Consider the example, I got (a bytea, b timestamp, c timestamp). Where b < c always, and both b and c have some default value, a can stay null. Now, I don't want to go berserk, and create aditional table for t

Re: [GENERAL] composite type and domain

2009-05-27 Thread Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
When I start to complain about domains and types in postgresql, people often ask me - so what's exactly wrong with it - well, here you go. I am trying to provide some feedback ;) -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www

Re: [GENERAL] composite type and domain

2009-05-27 Thread Merlin Moncure
2009/5/25 Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz : > Why is it not possible to create domain on composite type ? > > Consider the example, I got (a bytea, b timestamp, c timestamp). Where > b < c always, and both b and c have some default value, a can stay > null. > Now, I don't want to go berserk, and create adition