Hans-Juergen Schoenig wrote:
> It has been made as "COPY FROM / TO view" because people wanted it to be
> done that way.
> My original proposal was in favour of arbitrary SELECTs (just like
> proposed by the TODO list) but this was rejected. So, we did it that way
> (had to explain to customer why views are better). Now everybody wants
> the original select which was proposed.
This is not the first time this happens. It has happened to Simon Riggs
at least once and to me as well. Sometimes "the community" just doesn't
realize what it wants, until what it think it wants is done and then
realizes it wants something else.
It is frustrating, but I don't see how to do things differently.
> Things have been submitted months ago and now we are short of time. I
> think everybody on the list is going a superior job but after 6 years I
> still have no idea how patches are treated ;).
It sucks that patches are posted and no action is taken on them for
months. I agree with that.
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2006-08-22 19:46:24|
|Subject: Re: Queries joining views |
|Previous:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2006-08-22 18:57:54|
|Subject: Re: BUG #2585: Please provide pkg-config support|
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2006-08-22 20:10:11|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] COPY view |
|Previous:||From: Andrew Dunstan||Date: 2006-08-22 17:11:22|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] COPY view|