On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 3:48 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi! > > I've skimmed through the thread and checked the patchset. Everything > looks good, except one paragraph, which doesn't look completely clear. > > + <para> > + This emulates the functionality provided by > + <xref linkend="sql-createtype"/> but sets the created object's > + <glossterm linkend="glossary-type-definition">type > definition</glossterm> > + to domain. > + </para> > > As I get it states that CREATE DOMAIN somehow "emulates" CREATE TYPE. > Could you please, rephrase it? It looks confusing to me yet. > v5 attached, looking at this fresh and with some comments to consider. I ended up just combining both patches into one. I did away with the glossary changes altogether, and the invention of the new term. I ended up limiting "type's type" to just domain usage but did a couple of a additional tweaks that tried to treat domains as not being actual types even though, at least in PostgreSQL, they are (at least as far as DROP TYPE is concerned - and since I don't have any understanding of the SQL Standard's decision to separate out create domain and create type I'll just stick to the implementation in front of me. David J.
001-v5-drop-if-exists-docs-and-tests.patch
Description: Binary data
