Gil Hale wrote: > <snipped> but at the > last moment opted for logical as I was once again hitting VFP tables. The > app has been extremely stable, running all over the US with no app related > crashes. But now I am looking at moving to a PostgreSQL back end > (scalability for > 2Gb file sizes, plus other goodies). So, now I am > wishing I had retained the numeric 0/1 logical field approach. I would not > be having any logical vs character vs numeric value issues.
I'm using INT/TINYINT (0/1) in my backend apps now for .T./.F. equivalence. -- Michael J. Babcock, MCP MB Software Solutions, LLC http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com http://fabmate.com "Work smarter, not harder, with MBSS custom software solutions!" _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
