| From: | Erik Wienhold <ewie(at)ewie(dot)name> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: CREATE TABLE creates a composite type corresponding to the table row, which is and is not there |
| Date: | 2024-07-26 02:11:22 |
| Message-ID: | ab400585-e89d-4479-a4bf-0a1c122b7bbf@ewie.name |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2024-07-25 22:29 +0200, Tom Lane wrote:
> Erik Wienhold <ewie(at)ewie(dot)name> writes:
> > Thanks, I didn't know that guideline. Both fixed in v6.
>
> This still isn't following our usual message style IMO. Here's a
> proposed v7 that outputs
>
> -ERROR: type stuff is not a composite type
> +ERROR: type stuff is the row type of another table
> +DETAIL: A typed table must use a stand-alone composite type created with CREATE TYPE.
>
> I did a bit of copy-editing on the docs changes too. One notable
> point is that I dropped the parenthetical bit about "(name optionally
> schema-qualified)". That struck me as quite unnecessary, and
> it definitely doesn't read well to have two parenthetical comments
> in a single four-line sentence.
Works for me. Thanks!
--
Erik
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Langote | 2024-07-26 02:12:27 | Re: pgsql: Add more SQL/JSON constructor functions |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2024-07-26 02:06:41 | Re: How to check if issue is solved? |