Re: Typed table DDL loose ends

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Typed table DDL loose ends
Date: 2011-04-18 15:46:50
Message-ID: 23126.1303141610@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> What about inverting the message phrasing, ie
>>
>> ERROR: type stuff must not be a table's row type

> It also can't be a view's row type, a sequence's row type, a foreign
> table's row type...

Well, you could say "relation's row type" if you wanted to be formally
correct, but I'm not convinced that's an improvement.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-04-18 15:59:36 Re: Typed table DDL loose ends
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2011-04-18 15:42:30 Re: [JDBC] JDBC connections to 9.1