Re: Typed tables

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Andrew Chernow <ac(at)esilo(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Typed tables
Date: 2010-01-11 22:16:47
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On mån, 2010-01-11 at 15:02 -0500, Andrew Chernow wrote:
> ISTM that the ultimate would be a 'create table (...._) without storage'
> (or some'm) and make 'create type' an alternate syntax for SQL
> conformance.

I don't really understand the purpose of that.

> For various reasons, we've internally adopted using create
> table for all composites and use a c-like naming convenstion of
> appending _t to such beasts.

Yes, I have a similar convention.

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matteo Beccati 2010-01-11 22:23:41 Re: mailing list archiver chewing patches
Previous Message Boszormenyi Zoltan 2010-01-11 21:35:49 lock_timeout GUC patch