how to create a new composite type using already existing composite types
Hi,
Is there a way to create a new composite type using already existing composite type?
For example,
CREATE TABLE inventory_item (
name text,
supplier_id integer REFERENCES suppliers,
price numeric CHECK (price > 0)
);
produces the following type automatically
CREATE TYPE inventory_item AS (
name text,
supplier_id integer,
price numeric
);
but I'd also like to have a type with an extra column for certain functions
CREATE TYPE inventory_item2 AS (
name text,
supplier_id integer,
price numeric,
size integer
);
but it would be handy if I could reuse inventory_item instead of having to retype the whole lot. I can't work out or find the right syntax, can anyone show me how? Any help would be much appreciated.
Regards
Iain
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 03:46 +0000, Iain Barnett wrote:
CREATE TYPE inventory_item2 AS (
name text,
supplier_id integer,
price numeric,
size integer
);but it would be handy if I could reuse inventory_item instead of
having to retype the whole lot. I can't work out or find the right
syntax, can anyone show me how? Any help would be much appreciated.
What about:
CREATE TYPE inventory_item2 AS (
ii inventory_item,
size integer
);
or:
CREATE TABLE inventory_item2 (
LIKE inventory_item,
size integer
);
and that will automatically create the type.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 03:46 +0000, Iain Barnett wrote:
CREATE TYPE inventory_item2 AS (
name text,
supplier_id integer,
price numeric,
size integer
);but it would be handy if I could reuse inventory_item instead of
having to retype the whole lot. I can't work out or find the right
syntax, can anyone show me how? Any help would be much appreciated.What about:
CREATE TYPE inventory_item2 AS (
ii inventory_item,
size integer
);or:
CREATE TABLE inventory_item2 (
LIKE inventory_item,
size integer
);
Pretty neat. I wasn't aware you could mix LIKE with explicit field
declarations.
Those expressions produce different results...the first creates a type
within a type (nested) and the second creates a new unnested type
based on the fields of the original type. The first expression
creates a dependency while the second does not. This flexibility is
only possible if you create types with the 'create table' statement.
merlin