On Oct 14, 10:45 pm, Sergi Vladykin <[email protected]> wrote: > But I agree that good user defined type system would be nice.
So do I. What's good engineering practice to someone may seem like architecture astronautism to others. User defined types (as Rami described) would let both "sides" to be happy. For example, for what I'm currently doing, I prefer shorthand like "IDENTITY" over something like "BIGINT AUTO_INCREMENT UNIQUE", and appreciate the ability to store UUIDs and ARRAYs out of the box. But I can imagine that someone responsible for something very big and critical would appreciate orthogonal, extremely exactly documented type system and throw any fuzzy shorthand over board :) Best Regards, Joonas -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "H2 Database" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/h2-database?hl=en.
