On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Jim Nasby <jim.na...@bluetreble.com> writes:
> > On 3/3/16 4:51 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> >> CREATE TABLE a(a int);
> >> CREATE TABLE b(a a.a%TYPE)
> >> And the people expecting the living relation between table a and table
> >> b. So when I do ALTER a.a, then b.a should be changed. What if I drop
> >> a.a or drop a?
> >> So this is reason, why I don't would this feature in SQL side.
> > I don't buy that. plpgsql doesn't work that way, so why would this?
> > *especially* with the %TYPE decorator.
> Yeah. The %TYPE decorator doesn't work like that in the core parser
> either: when you use it, the referenced type is determined immediately
> and then it's just as if you'd written that type name to begin with.
I'm missing something here...%TYPE ends up getting parsed repeatedly and so
appears to be change if the variable upon which it is based changes - even
if once parsed it remains constant for the lifetime of the function's
I guess what is being said is that the "constant" behavior in SQL ends up
being permanent because a given statement is only ever conceptually parsed
and executed a single time - unlike a function body. The nature of any
solution would still have the same characteristics within a function
because the inherent re-parsing nature and not because of any direct
capability of %TYPE itself.
I do not see a reason for any of these "type operators" to work
> Another analogy that might help make the point is
> set search_path = a;
> create table myschema.tab(f1 mytype);
> set search_path = b;
> If there are types "mytype" in both schemas a and b, is myschema.tab.f1
> now of type b.mytype? No. The meaning of the type reference is
> determined when the command executes, and then you're done.
And its no different than our treatment of "*"
CREATE VIEW test_view
Adding columns to temp_table doesn't impact which columns the view returns.