| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, andrew(at)supernews(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: plpgsql by default |
| Date: | 2006-04-11 22:15:33 |
| Message-ID: | 1144793733.13511.11.camel@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> No, but does that mean we should increase the potential by adding in
> something that not everyone that runs PostgreSQL actually uses?
Using this argument I could say that we don't need primary keys, foreign
keys, views or rules. Especially the latter 3 ;).
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
> ----
> Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
> Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
>
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Hallgren | 2006-04-11 22:17:34 | Re: plpgsql by default |
| Previous Message | Mischa Sandberg | 2006-04-11 22:13:25 | Re: plpgsql by default |