2007-10-13_11:12:05-0400 Gregory Stark <stark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > "Ron Peterson" <ron.peterson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > 2007-10-13_08:50:56-0400 Ron Peterson <ron.peterson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > >> 2007-10-13_01:22:06-0400 Gregory Stark <stark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > > >> > And normally you would define your own datatype and not use bytea. > >> > >> Actually, I already have my data in a structure much like varlena. > > > > Pght, I misunderstood what you were saying. You mean create a > > full-blown new type. I was thinking completely internally. Yeah, > > that's probably a better approach - I'll do that. > > Or you could just define new functions which operate on bytea if you're just > storing binary data. A tuple of two or three bytea values (cryptographic keys); e.g. (bytea, bytea) > I don't understand what you mean with "internally" if you're storing > this in tuples? I thought you were talking about something like a C structure - I think I just misunderstood what you were saying. I'm still a little mixed up about just exactly what, internally, a tuple and a tupledesc are and how they are used. I think I can get where I want to go without completely figuring that out right now though... -- Ron Peterson https://www.yellowbank.com/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
