Re: PostGIS Integration

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Paul Ramsey <pramsey(at)refractions(dot)net>, Mark Cave-Ayland <m(dot)cave-ayland(at)webbased(dot)co(dot)uk>, dblasby(at)refractions(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostGIS Integration
Date: 2004-02-04 07:01:20
Message-ID: 402098C0.2050100@familyhealth.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> I can't see any way to handle parameterized types without extending the
> grammar individually for each one --- otherwise it's too hard to tell
> them apart from function calls. That makes it a bit hard to do 'em
> as plug-ins :-(. The grammar hacks are certainly ugly though, and if
> someone could think of a way, I'm all ears...

Disallow it in table definitions, but allow it in domain definitions...

Chris

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-02-04 07:07:06 Re: PostGIS Integration
Previous Message Tatsuo Ishii 2004-02-04 05:39:37 Re: PITR Dead horse?