Alvaro Herrera wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
The first is in type_sanity, which basically doesn't understand that
complex types now have array types associated with them and thinks
they're orphan array types, so it's actually the test that's not
right.
Hmm, I question the usefulness of automatically creating array types for
all relation types that are created -- the catalog bloat seems a bit too
much. An array of pg_autovacuum for example, does that make sense?
I'm not sure what was the reaction to having an "CREATE TYPE foo ARRAY
OF bar" command of some kind? I think this was discussed but not
explicitely rejected, or was it?
It certainly seems rather inconsistent to have array types autocreated
for some types but not others. But unless we create them for all types
then I think we need a command such as you suggest.
How much bloat will this really be? If it's not used it won't get into
the type cache. I find it hard to believe there will be any very
significant performance effect.
cheers
andrew
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match
