Re: pg_type

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_type
Date: 2007-05-07 23:15:31
Message-ID: 20183.1178579731@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> One thing I've been burnt by in the past is failing to update the
>> pg_class.h DATA statement to show the right number of columns. Also,
>> you fixed both representations of the attribute list in pg_attribute.h,
>> right?

> Thanks. Yes, it was both pg_class and pg_attribute that I had missed.
> All better now. ;-)

Yeah, adding a column to one of the core "bootstrap" tables is a real
PITA. But I guess we don't do it often enough to justify having more
infrastructure for that.

> Now to use the field ....

If it hasn't occurred to you already: please add a test or two in
typ_sanity.sql to check that the column is sane, eg the type it points
to is a varlena type that points back to the element type.

regards, tom lane

In response to

  • Re: pg_type at 2007-05-07 23:04:39 from Andrew Dunstan

Responses

  • Re: pg_type at 2007-05-08 00:05:15 from Andrew Dunstan

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hiroshi Inoue 2007-05-07 23:45:04 Re: psqlodbc - psqlodbc: Put Autotools-generated files into subdirectory
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2007-05-07 23:04:39 Re: pg_type