Re: Typed tables

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: James Pye <lists(at)jwp(dot)name>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Typed tables
Date: 2009-11-05 20:50:27
Message-ID: 1257454227.11856.25.camel@vanquo.pezone.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On tor, 2009-11-05 at 11:41 -0700, James Pye wrote:
> Any plans to allow the specification of multiple types to define the
> table?
>
> "CREATE TABLE employee OF employee_data_type, persons_data_type;"

Not really, but it does open up interesting possibilities, if we just
allow composite types to participate in inheritance relationships.
Think abstract base class. That's pretty much the idea. Come to think
of it, that's how the SQL standard defined inheritance. Sounds
interesting. And might actually be simpler to implement.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-11-05 21:33:07 Why do OLD and NEW have special internal names?
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2009-11-05 20:47:51 Re: Typed tables