> > Would it be appropriate to contribute BIT_AND and BIT_OR aggregates > > I am confused why you would use bit on integers
Well, (I think) I need them to manipulate pg_catalog's aclitem bitfields. I plea not guilty for the design of pg_catalog;-) Moreover, I added aclitem accessors which return INT4 in a recent patch that you kindly applied. > when there is a bit type with an AND operator: > pg_catalog | & | bit | bit | bit | bitwise and Sure. "&" is also available for all integer types. BTW, I'm arguing about AGGREGATE functions, and there is no aggregate functions at the time, neither for int* nor for bit. SELECT BIT_OR(aclitem_privs(...)) AS effective_privs FROM ... WHERE aclitem_grantee(...)=... AND ... ; Or maybe I cannot understand why you're confused? -- Fabien Coelho - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
