On 30.09.2020 05:00, David G. Johnston wrote:
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 3:48 PM Alexander Korotkov
<aekorot...@gmail.com <mailto:aekorot...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi!
I've skimmed through the thread and checked the patchset. Everything
looks good, except one paragraph, which doesn't look completely clear.
+ <para>
+ This emulates the functionality provided by
+ <xref linkend="sql-createtype"/> but sets the created object's
+ <glossterm linkend="glossary-type-definition">type
definition</glossterm>
+ to domain.
+ </para>
As I get it states that CREATE DOMAIN somehow "emulates" CREATE TYPE.
Could you please, rephrase it? It looks confusing to me yet.
v5 attached, looking at this fresh and with some comments to consider.
I ended up just combining both patches into one.
I did away with the glossary changes altogether, and the invention of
the new term. I ended up limiting "type's type" to just domain usage
but did a couple of a additional tweaks that tried to treat domains as
not being actual types even though, at least in PostgreSQL, they are
(at least as far as DROP TYPE is concerned - and since I don't have
any understanding of the SQL Standard's decision to separate out
create domain and create type I'll just stick to the implementation in
front of me.
David J.
Reminder from a CF manager, as this thread was inactive for a while.
Alexander, I see you signed up as a committer for this entry. Are you
going to continue this work?
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
