Re: Typed table DDL loose ends

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:20:21AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I tweaked the comments accordingly, and also reverted your change to
> the error message, because I don't want to introduce new terminology
> here that we're not using anywhere else.

FWIW, the term "stand-alone composite type" appears twice in our documentation.

> I also thought about making this use parserOpenTable() rather than
> relation_open(), but it turns out that's not so easy, because the
> typed table name is getting shoved into a TypeName rather than a
> RangeVar.  I don't think that's the choice I would have made but I'm
> not sure how excited it's worth getting about it.

I hadn't thought about this angle.