On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: > While looking at the typed table/pg_upgrade problem, I ran into a few smaller > problems in the area. I'm not envisioning a need for much code shift to fix > them, but there are a few points of policy. > > * Table row types used in typed tables vs. ALTER TABLE > As previously noted: > CREATE TABLE t (); > CREATE TABLE is_a OF t; > ALTER TABLE t ADD c int; > \d is_a > -- No columns > > At first I thought we should just forbid the use of table row types in CREATE > TABLE OF. However, we've been quite systematic about not distinguishing > between > table row types and CREATE TYPE AS types; I've only found a distinction in > ALTER > TABLE/ALTER TYPE, where we direct you to the other command. It would be nice > to > preserve this heritage. That doesn't look particularly difficult; it may > actually yield a net code reduction.
I guess my gut feeling is that it would make more sense to forbid it outright for 9.1, and we can look at relaxing that restriction later if we're so inclined. Much as with the problem Tom fixed in commit eb51af71f241e8cb199790dee9ad246bb36b3287, I'm concerned that there may be other cases that we're not thinking of right now, and while we could find them all and fix them, the amount of functionality gained is fairly marginal, and I don't really want to hold up the release while we bug-swat. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers