Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there a reason why the conversion from CHAR to CHAR(1) is done in
> analyze.c:transformColumnType rather than right in the
> grammar?
Well, transformColumnType does database access, which is verboten during
the grammar phase. (The grammar has to
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On what grounds do you claim that behavior is incorrect?
> Because SQL says so:
> ::=
> CHARACTER []
> | CHAR []
> | CHARACTER VARYING
> | CHAR VARYING
>
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Currently, CHAR is correctly interpreted as CHAR(1), but VARCHAR is
> incorrectly interpreted as VARCHAR(). Any reason for that,
> besides the fact that it of course makes much more sense than VARCHAR(1)?
On what grounds do you claim that behavior i
I've been wondering the difference in varchar and TEXT in the aspect of
length and indexing - what would happen if you tried to index a
varchar(BLCKSZ) ? I know you can index smaller portions of text (at least it
appears you can) so why not larger alphanumeric data? (I'm not complaining,
just tryi
