Chris Bitmead wrote:
>
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >
> > Chris Bitmead writes:
> >
> > > Attached is a first attempt at implementing the classoid feature.
> >
> > I'm wondering what other people think about the naming. Firstly, it's my
> > feeling that TABLEOID would be more in line with the general conventions.
>
> I was thinking this myself today. Mainly because I wonder if in the
> future there may be support for more than one table implementing a
> particular class type. On the other hand the oid is a reference to the
> pg_class table. Maybe pg_class should be renamed pg_table? Anyway, my
> current thinking is that tableoid is better.
Or put another way, I see SQL3 has a feature S051 "CREATE TABLE
<tablename> OF <type>", and it seems maybe the <type> should be called a
class, and the table a collection of that class. This would advocate the
tableoid name I think. Someone please correct me if my thinking is
muddled here.
