On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 07:35:46PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I've obviously misunderstood the scope of the TODO because it appears
> > that an INSERT into pg_type at creation time for compound types that
> > looks something like the below would do it.  What have I missed?
> There are a couple of issues.  One is that we probably don't want
> two pg_type entries for every single table.

Now that you mention it, I would want that if that's what it takes to
get arrays for them.  The long-term goal here is to make all of
PostgreSQL's types play nicely together.  I'm guessing that SETOF
will eventually be a way to describe a collection because MULTISET is
in SQL:2003.

> Will you be satisfied if only CREATE TYPE AS ... makes an array
> type?  The other is that, at least at the time they were written,
> the array support routines couldn't handle composite array values.
> Things might or might not be easier today; I don't think we had
> record_in and record_out in their current form then.

OK.  What about pg_depend?

David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778        AIM: dfetter666
                              Skype: davidfetter

Remember to vote!

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?


Reply via email to