Re: pg_class and enum types - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gevik Babakhani
Subject Re: pg_class and enum types
Date
Msg-id 4A19C77F.6010700@xs4all.nl
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_class and enum types  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>   
>> Gevik Babakhani wrote:
>>     
>>> select * from pg_class where relname='test_type'
>>>       
>
>   
>> It's not so much that enum types are handled specially, but that 
>> composite types are. :-)
>>     
>
> Relations (tables) have always had both pg_class and pg_type entries.
> The pg_class entry denotes the relation proper, the pg_type entry
> denotes the relation's rowtype.
>
> Composite types have the same two entries, there's just a different
> notion of which one is primary.
>
> (The reason a composite type has to have a pg_class entry is that
> it has pg_attribute entries, and those have to have something in
> pg_class for their attrelid to link to.)
>
>             regards, tom lane
>
>   
Thank you :)

-- 
Regards,
Gevik



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] pull raw text of a message by message-id
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: integer overflow in reloption.h