On 12/31/2016 08:25 AM, Thomas Kellerer wrote:
> David G. Johnston schrieb am 31.12.2016 um 16:51:
>>> I wonder what the benefit of a typed table is and when this would be
>>> useful?
>>
>> But I'd say if you want a table with said structure you should plan on
>> droppign the original type after you've altered all references to it to
>> point to the new implicit type created with the table.
>
> I am not planning to use it.
>
> I am just wondering _if_ there is an advantage to this setup
>
> Apparently at some point someone thought it would be useful, otherwise
> it wouldn't have been implemented I guess.
I see it as completing the loop. A table creates a composite type, a
composite type creates a table. Not sure where that falls on the useful
scale.
>
> Thomas
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
