Re: "name" vs "alias" in datatype table - Mailing list pgsql-docs

From Eric Hanson
Subject Re: "name" vs "alias" in datatype table
Date
Msg-id CACA6kxixrAJoTt7MpUtbuT++JDifWiPQCLJ5YzFzpML2Pm-WYQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: "name" vs "alias" in datatype table  (Eric Hanson <eric@aquameta.com>)
Responses Re: "name" vs "alias" in datatype table
List pgsql-docs
The larger point being, the "name" vs "alias" paradigm presented in this table does not accurately represent PostgreSQL, and conveys an inaccurate picture of the relationship between type names.  int4 is not an "alias".

On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:10 AM Eric Hanson <eric@aquameta.com> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 7:40 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote:
On 23.11.23 21:51, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> I think there could be some clarification of what is a "name" vs. "alias" on
> the datatypes table.  Right now, what's in the "Aliases" column is sometimes
> postgres's internal type (e.g. `pg_catalog.int4`), and sometimes the "pretty
> name", (e.g. `integer`).

This appears not to be true.  `integer` is not listed as an alias.

Sorry, "int" is, and it is not in pg_type. 

pgsql-docs by date:

Previous
From: Eric Hanson
Date:
Subject: Re: "name" vs "alias" in datatype table
Next
From: "Euler Taveira"
Date:
Subject: Re: Clarification regarding CREATE TABLE LIKE and FOREIGN KEYS