Re: CREATE TABLE AS standard?

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: "Ross J(dot) Reedstrom" <reedstrm(at)wallace(dot)ece(dot)rice(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: CREATE TABLE AS standard?
Date: 2000-05-01 15:49:01
Message-ID: 200005011549.LAA19207@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > I know I use that version my self a lot more than the SELECT INTO
> > version. We probably got it 'free' from the CREATE VIEW semantics,
> > as Tom suggested. I tend to use it to 'materialize' a new table when
> > I'm altering schema (either denormalizing, or normalizing) and need to
> > convert the type of a column. It's a little handier than separate CREATE
> > TABLE and INSERT INTO statements, although it's semantically equivalent.
>
> I implemented CREATE TABLE AS as a semantically clearer version of
> SELECT/INTO, which was (afaik) in the original Postgres95 and probably
> earlier.
>
> They are equivalent. btw, I assume that Tom used the term "abuse" in
> the supportive sense of the word? :)
>

I covered SELECT...INTO in my book, with a short paragraph showing
CREATE TABLE...AS is equivalent. Which one should I use in my book as
the preferred?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Lockhart 2000-05-01 16:03:33 Re: CREATE TABLE AS standard?
Previous Message Thomas Lockhart 2000-05-01 13:06:59 Re: How to compile a dynamically loadable object file