Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] line datatype

2002-07-16 Thread Lamar Owen
On Tuesday 16 July 2002 04:42 pm, Thomas Lockhart wrote: > > On the other hand, if you want to enter two points why don't you just > > use lseg to begin with? There's not much justification for having a > > separate line type unless it behaves differently ... > They are different. One is infinit

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] line datatype

2002-07-16 Thread Thomas Lockhart
> >> No one likes entering an equation. Two points seems the simplest. > > That it does. > On the other hand, if you want to enter two points why don't you just > use lseg to begin with? There's not much justification for having a > separate line type unless it behaves differently ... They are

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] line datatype

2002-07-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> No one likes entering an equation. Two points seems the simplest. > > > That it does. > > On the other hand, if you want to enter two points why don't you just > use lseg to begin with? There's not much justification for having

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] line datatype

2002-07-16 Thread Tom Lane
Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> No one likes entering an equation. Two points seems the simplest. > That it does. On the other hand, if you want to enter two points why don't you just use lseg to begin with? There's not much justification for having a separate line type unless i

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] line datatype

2002-07-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
Lamar Owen wrote: > On Tuesday 16 July 2002 11:29 am, Thomas Lockhart wrote: > > > > We do need a solution for exact dump/reload of floating-point data, > > > > but I don't see why the lack of it should be reason to disable access > > > > to the LINE type. > > > > I don't understand why dumping t

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] line datatype

2002-07-16 Thread Lamar Owen
On Tuesday 16 July 2002 11:29 am, Thomas Lockhart wrote: > > > We do need a solution for exact dump/reload of floating-point data, > > > but I don't see why the lack of it should be reason to disable access > > > to the LINE type. > > I don't understand why dumping the two point values isn't suff

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] line datatype

2002-07-16 Thread Thomas Lockhart
... > Well, the \dT documentation used to show line as two points, so I > assumed that was how it was specified. Hmm. And it seems I entered it a few years ago ;) Cut and paste error. At that time the line type was defined but has never had the i/o routines enabled. > No one likes entering an e

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] line datatype

2002-07-16 Thread Tim Hart
Actually... as one with the vested interest... I'm not opposed to entering an equation in one of the basic algebraic forms. Given that line types and line segment types both exist, I'm happy to weigh the cost/benefit between choosing an lseg and entering 2 points, or choosing a line and enterin

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] line datatype

2002-07-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
Thomas Lockhart wrote: > ... > > > We do need a solution for exact dump/reload of floating-point data, > > > but I don't see why the lack of it should be reason to disable access > > > to the LINE type. > > I don't understand why dumping the two point values isn't sufficient. > > Which two point

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] line datatype

2002-07-16 Thread Thomas Lockhart
... > > We do need a solution for exact dump/reload of floating-point data, > > but I don't see why the lack of it should be reason to disable access > > to the LINE type. > I don't understand why dumping the two point values isn't sufficient. Which two point values? LINE is handled as an equatio

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] line datatype

2002-07-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The issue is in choosing an external format for LINE which does not lose > > precision during dump/reload. > > Why is this any worse for LINE than for any of the other geometric > types (or for plain floats, for that matter)? > >

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] line datatype

2002-07-16 Thread Tom Lane
Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The issue is in choosing an external format for LINE which does not lose > precision during dump/reload. Why is this any worse for LINE than for any of the other geometric types (or for plain floats, for that matter)? We do need a solution for exact

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] line datatype

2002-07-16 Thread Thomas Lockhart
> It would be nice to get the line type working 100%. Thomas says the > problem is input/output format. I don't completely understand. The issue is in choosing an external format for LINE which does not lose precision during dump/reload. Internally, LINE is described by a formula which is likel

Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] line datatype

2002-07-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
OK, I have added comments to \dT and SGML docs to mention that 'line' is not implemented. This should help future folks. It would be nice to get the line type working 100%. Thomas says the problem is input/output format. I don't completely understand.