Re: Syntax for partitioning

[Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>]

On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 17:39 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> IMO, the real problem is that the type interface is poorly
> encapsulated.  There's way too much code that knows about the internal
> details of a type - namely, that it's a 32-bit integer modified by a
> second 32-bit integer.  I think there are still places where the code
> doesn't even know about typmod.  If we're going to go to the trouble
> of changing anything, I think it should probably involve inserting an
> abstraction layer that will make future extensions easier.  But I have
> a feeling that's going to be a tough sell.

Yeah. We're way off topic for partitioning, so I think it's best to just
table this discussion until someone comes up with a good idea.

It's not the end of the world to write some generic C code, and have
multiple types make use of it, e.g. PERIOD, PERIODTZ, INT4RANGE,
FLOAT8RANGE, etc. It's a little redundant and creates some catalog
bloat, but I'm not too concerned about it right now. Certainly not
enough to rewrite the type system.

Regards,
	Jeff Davis