| From: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Arrays of Complex Types |
| Date: | 2007-04-09 19:57:34 |
| Message-ID: | 20070409195734.GC30972@svana.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 10:14:41AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> . defer for the present any consideration of a "CREATE TYPE foo AS ARRAY
> ..." command.
What is the rationale for allowing people to name the array type. When
I originally proposed the syntax I presumed that the array name would
be kept internal and hidden from the user, just that it would exist
after that command.
What possible reason is there for allowing the user to give the array
type a name?
Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-04-09 20:07:16 | Re: [HACKERS] Arrays of Complex Types |
| Previous Message | Larry Rosenman | 2007-04-09 18:58:20 | Re: What X86/X64 OS's do we need coverage for? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-04-09 20:07:16 | Re: [HACKERS] Arrays of Complex Types |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-04-09 16:58:12 | PGPROCs of autovac workers (was Re: [PATCHES] autovacuum multiworkers, patch 5) |