Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 10:17 PM, Robert Haas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 7:57 PM, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dmitry Koterov wrote:
Could you please say, if ALTER TYPE ... ADD COLUMN is planned for a future
PostgreSQL version?
It is not currently on the TODO list.
Perhaps we could add it? It's been complained about more than once in
this space.
Well, new features that have a perfectly acceptable and usable
workaround typically have a fairly low priority of fixing :-)
Since tables are basically types, I'm not sure what the difference is
between tables and composite types (meaning, why do we have the
composite type syntax at all?) I'm not sure if this came up during
the design discussion or not.
Your "workaround" involves have a redundant table that you don't ever
intend to populate.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
