Thank you, Pavel and Tom! It works great! On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 9:30 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I wrote: > > For a composite type, pg_type.typrelid links to pg_class and pg_attribute > > entries that work much like a table. > > Actually, you could reverse that: for a table, pg_type.typrelid links to > pg_class and pg_attribute entries that work much like a composite type. > > For both relations and composite types, there are pg_class and pg_type > entries that (by convention only) have the same names and namespaces. > They cross-link to each other via pg_class.reltype and pg_type.typrelid. > The associated pg_attribute entries have attrelid matching the pg_class > OID. The catalog entries for the two cases are pretty nearly > indistinguishable except for pg_class.relkind. Again, it's only by > convention that we consider that the pg_type entry is primary for a > composite type but pg_class is primary for a relation. > > Of course, a relation has some underlying storage (for most relkinds), > and it will likely have associated entries in other catalogs that a > composite type won't. But the core catalog entries are about the same. > > regards, tom lane >
