Re: Support for %TYPE in CREATE FUNCTION

> Of course, this is made much easier if there is a pg_depends table
> which accurately records dependencies.

Yes, that was a nifty idea.

> I have a meta-point: the choices to be made here are not all that
> interesting.  They do have to be defined.  But almost any definition
> is OK.  Users are not going to routinely redefine tables with attached
> functions; when they do, they must be prepared to consider the
> consequences.  If anybody thinks that different choices should be made
> in this case, that is certainly fine with me.
> 
> If you agree with me on the meta-point, then this is just a quibble
> about my original patch (which made choice 1 above).  If you disagree
> with me, I'd like to understand why.

I agree that having problems when a table is defined is acceptable.  It
is not like someone is _forced_ to use the feature.

So far that is three or four people who like the feature, and I have
only heard one opposed.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026