| From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SQL Spec Compliance Questions |
| Date: | 2004-04-02 16:48:03 |
| Message-ID: | 406D9943.8070401@joeconway.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-sql |
Josh Berkus wrote:
>>4.16.2 Referenceable tables, subtables, and supertables
>> A table BT whose row type is derived from a structured type ST is
>> called a typed table. Only a base table or a view can be a typed
>> table. A typed table has columns corresponding, in name and
>> declared type, to every attribute of ST and one other column REFC
>> that is the self-referencing column of BT; let REFCN be the
>>
>>I really don't quite understand this, but I don't think we have it ;-)
> Was the SQL99 Committee smoking crack, or what? What the heck is that
> *for*?
After re-reading it, I think it is related to (or at least similar to)
the work Tom is currently doing to allow composite types as table
attributes.
Joe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-04-02 16:53:04 | Re: SQL Spec Compliance Questions |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-04-02 16:38:22 | Re: SQL Spec Compliance Questions |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-04-02 16:53:04 | Re: SQL Spec Compliance Questions |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-04-02 16:38:22 | Re: SQL Spec Compliance Questions |