From: | KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: ALTER TYPE extensions |
Date: | 2010-09-22 01:40:11 |
Message-ID: | 4C995E7B.2090900@ak.jp.nec.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
(2010/09/22 5:17), Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On tis, 2010-09-21 at 17:53 +0900, KaiGai Kohei wrote:
>> Sorry, I missed a bug when we create a typed table using composite
>> type which has been altered.
>
>> Perhaps, we also need to patch at transformOfType() to
>> skip attributes with attisdropped.
>
> Fixed.
>
OK,
>> An additional question. It seems me we can remove all the attributes
>> from the composite type, although CREATE TYPE prohibits to create
>> a composite type without any attribute.
>> What does it mean a composite type with no attribute?
>> Or, do we need a restriction to prevent the last one attribute?
>
> We need to allow the creation of zero-attribute types then; same as with
> CREATE TABLE. I have fixed that now.
>
OK,
This version of the patch seems to me OK.
I marked it as 'ready for committer'.
Thanks,
--
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2010-09-22 01:54:07 | Re: What happened to the is_<type> family of functions proposal? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-09-22 01:32:12 | Re: Get the offset of a tuple inside a table |