Re: User Defined Types in Java

Tom Lane wrote:

>Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> writes:
>  
>
>>Actually, I'm think this whole automatic creation of a shell-type a bit
>>silly anyway. Why not simply solve the problem directly like so:
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>CREATE TYPE complex AS SHELL;
>>    
>>
>
>One of the unwritten consequences of the way that it works now is that
>only superusers can "clutter the catalogs" with shell types.  
>  
>
I suppose we could restrict this variant to superusers, at least initially.

[snip]

>Having said that, I agree that this seems conceptually cleaner, though
>I'm not sure we could ever get rid of the old way because of backward
>compatibility issues.
>
>    
>

They are not mutually exclusive, are they? I too like Martijn's suggestion.

cheers

andrew