Re: Range Types, constructors, and the type system

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
Cc: Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Range Types, constructors, and the type system
Date: 2011-07-01 05:52:39
Message-ID: 1309499559.10707.146.camel@jdavis
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 09:58 -0700, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Jun 30, 2011, at 9:29 AM, Jeff Davis wrote:
>
> > Right. In that respect, it's more like a record type: many possible
> > record types exist, but you only define the ones you want.
>
> Well, okay. How is this same problem handled for RECORD types, then?

What problem, exactly? For a given list of subtypes, there is only one
valid record type.

Also, record is not a great example. The implementation uses at least
one pretty horrible hack.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2011-07-01 05:53:53 Re: add support for logging current role (what to review?)
Previous Message Mikko Partio 2011-07-01 05:18:39 PANIC while doing failover (streaming replication)