I could not find any explanation of the following behaviour in docs -
Our documentation for CREATE TABLE says:
CREATE TABLE also automatically creates a data type that represents
the composite type corresponding to one row of the table. Therefore,
tables cannot have the same name as any existing
On 2024-03-08 01:12 +0100, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> I could not find any explanation of the following behaviour in docs -
>
>
> Our documentation for CREATE TABLE says:
>
> CREATE TABLE also automatically creates a data type that represents
> the composite type corresponding to one row of the tabl
I wrote:
> The attached patch fixes the error message and also documents that
> requirement.
On second thought, adding a separate error message doesn't really make
sense. The attached v2 is a simpler patch that instead modifies the
existing error message.
--
Erik
I wrote:
> The attached v2 is a simpler patch that instead modifies the existing
> error message.
Forgot to attach v2.
--
Erik
>From 9ab6b625e8f93ae2957144ec7f0ba32cf8a3bb5b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Erik Wienhold
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2024 04:21:56 +0100
Subject: [PATCH v2] Document that typed
On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 12:41 AM Erik Wienhold wrote:
> Thanks, fixed in v4. Looks like American English prefers that comma and
> it's also more common in our docs.
Reviewing this patch:
- Creates a typed table, which takes its
- structure from the specified composite type (name option
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 8:46 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 12:41 AM Erik Wienhold wrote:
> > Thanks, fixed in v4. Looks like American English prefers that comma and
> > it's also more common in our docs.
>
> Reviewing this patch:
>
> - Creates a typed table, which takes it
On 2024-05-16 17:47 +0200, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 8:46 AM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 12:41 AM Erik Wienhold wrote:
> > > Thanks, fixed in v4. Looks like American English prefers that comma and
> > > it's also more common in our docs.
> >
> > Revi
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 4:57 PM Erik Wienhold wrote:
> On 2024-05-16 17:47 +0200, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 8:46 AM Robert Haas
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 12:41 AM Erik Wienhold wrote:
> > > > Thanks, fixed in v4. Looks like American English prefers th
On 2024-05-18 03:27 +0200, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > On 2024-05-16 17:47 +0200, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > > We have a glossary.
>
> If sticking with stand-alone composite type as a formal term we should
> document it in the glossary. It's unclear whether this will survive review
> though.
Erik Wienhold writes:
> Thanks, I didn't know that guideline. Both fixed in v6.
This still isn't following our usual message style IMO. Here's a
proposed v7 that outputs
-ERROR: type stuff is not a composite type
+ERROR: type stuff is the row type of another table
+DETAIL: A typed table mus
On 2024-07-25 22:29 +0200, Tom Lane wrote:
> Erik Wienhold writes:
> > Thanks, I didn't know that guideline. Both fixed in v6.
>
> This still isn't following our usual message style IMO. Here's a
> proposed v7 that outputs
>
> -ERROR: type stuff is not a composite type
> +ERROR: type stuff i
Erik Wienhold writes:
> On 2024-07-25 22:29 +0200, Tom Lane wrote:
>> This still isn't following our usual message style IMO. Here's a
>> proposed v7 that outputs ...
> Works for me. Thanks!
Pushed, then.
regards, tom lane
On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 9:29 PM Erik Wienhold wrote:
> I wrote:
> > The attached v2 is a simpler patch that instead modifies the existing
> > error message.
>
> Forgot to attach v2.
>
>
For consideration for the doc portion. The existing wording is too
imprecise for my liking and just tacking on
On 2024-03-29 02:42 +0100, David G. Johnston wrote:
> For consideration for the doc portion. The existing wording is too
> imprecise for my liking and just tacking on "expects...create type" is
> jarring.
>
> """
> Creates a typed table, which takes it structure from an existing (name
> optionall
On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 8:02 PM Erik Wienhold wrote:
> Thanks, that sounds better. I incorporated that with some minor edits
> in the attached v3.
>
Looks good.
You added my missing ( but dropped the comma after "i.e."
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_table.sgml
b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_
On 2024-04-04 03:29 +0200, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 8:02 PM Erik Wienhold wrote:
>
> > Thanks, that sounds better. I incorporated that with some minor edits
> > in the attached v3.
> >
>
> You added my missing ( but dropped the comma after "i.e."
Thanks, fixed in v4.
On 29.03.24 02:42, David G. Johnston wrote:
We do use the term "stand-alone composite" in create type so I'm
inclined to use it instead of "composite created with CREATE TYPE";
especially in the error messages; I'm a bit more willing to add the
cross-reference to create type in the user docs.
17 matches
Mail list logo