On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 07:35:46PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter <david@fetter.org> 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?
Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666
Skype: davidfetter
Remember to vote!
