Horton

Re: Typed table DDL loose ends

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Date: 2011-04-18T15:59:36Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Prevent a rowtype from being included in itself.

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> What about inverting the message phrasing, ie
>>>
>>> ERROR: type stuff must not be a table's row type
>
>> It also can't be a view's row type, a sequence's row type, a foreign
>> table's row type...
>
> Well, you could say "relation's row type" if you wanted to be formally
> correct, but I'm not convinced that's an improvement.

Me neither, especially since composite types are also relations, in
our parlance.

I'm not strongly attached to or repulsed by any particular option, so
however we end up doing it is OK with me.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company