On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 07:57:29PM -0700, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: > > While looking at the typed table/pg_upgrade problem, I ran into a few > > smaller > > problems in the area. ?I'm not envisioning a need for much code shift to fix > > them, but there are a few points of policy. > > > > * Table row types used in typed tables vs. ALTER TABLE > > As previously noted: > > ?CREATE TABLE t (); > > ?CREATE TABLE is_a OF t; > > ?ALTER TABLE t ADD c int; > > ?\d is_a > > ?-- No columns > > > > At first I thought we should just forbid the use of table row types in > > CREATE > > TABLE OF. ?However, we've been quite systematic about not distinguishing > > between > > table row types and CREATE TYPE AS types; I've only found a distinction in > > ALTER > > TABLE/ALTER TYPE, where we direct you to the other command. ?It would be > > nice to > > preserve this heritage. ?That doesn't look particularly difficult; it may > > actually yield a net code reduction. > > I guess my gut feeling is that it would make more sense to forbid it > outright for 9.1, and we can look at relaxing that restriction later > if we're so inclined. > > Much as with the problem Tom fixed in commit > eb51af71f241e8cb199790dee9ad246bb36b3287, I'm concerned that there may > be other cases that we're not thinking of right now, and while we > could find them all and fix them, the amount of functionality gained > is fairly marginal, and I don't really want to hold up the release > while we bug-swat.
Symmetry was the best cause I could find to continue allowing it, and your case in favor of reducing the bug surface is more compelling. Let's forbid it. Thanks, nm -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
