Re: Typed tables

On Nov 5, 2009, at 10:24 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> One thing I'm not sure of is whether to keep the implicit row type in
> that case.  That is, would the above command sequence still create a
> "persons" type?  We could keep that so as to preserve the property "a
> table always has a row type of the same name"

+1 for keeping it.

> Thoughts?

Any plans to allow the specification of multiple types to define the  
table?

   "CREATE TABLE employee OF employee_data_type, persons_data_type;"