Re: Typed tables - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: Typed tables
Date
Msg-id 1257715067.5363.16.camel@ebony
Whole thread Raw
In response to Typed tables  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: Typed tables
Re: Typed tables
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 2009-11-05 at 19:24 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> This is useful in conjunction with PL/Proxy and similar RPC-type
> setups. On the frontend/proxy instances you only create the type, and
> the backend instances you create the storage for the type, and the
> database system would give you a little support keeping them in sync.
> Think interface and implementation.

Not sure I see why this is good. Why is issuing CREATE TYPE so much
easier than using CREATE TABLE? Is it worth the extra syntax and code to
support it? Can we do anything additional as a result of this? Is this
required by the standard or are we going past the standard?

-- Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Why do OLD and NEW have special internal names?
Next
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: operator exclusion constraints