Re: relation vs table... - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: relation vs table...
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.44.0310091517330.31740-100000@peter.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to relation vs table...  (Terrence Brannon <metaperl@urth.org>)
List pgsql-general
Terrence Brannon writes:

> I don't understand why Postgres thinks I am creating a relation _and_ I
> don't know what it considers a relation to be.

In the context of relational databases, relation means the same thing as
table.  Because of some implementation artifacts, PostgreSQL internally
treats tables, views, indexes, and sequences alike to some extent and
refers to all of them together as relations.  So when you see an error
message telling you that a relation was not found, that means PostgreSQL
was looking for a table, a view, an index, or a sequence.  This artificial
terminology isn't ideal, but it creates few problems in practice.

--
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: relation vs table...
Next
From: Oliver Elphick
Date:
Subject: Re: relation vs table...