Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] New XML section for documentation

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>,PostgreSQL-documentation <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org>,Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New XML section for documentation
Date: 2006-08-26 17:29:40
Message-ID: 20060826172940.GO11427@fetter.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docspgsql-hackers
On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 01:16:06PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> David Fetter wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 12:48:32PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > David Fetter wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 08:37:19PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > 
> > > > > > Speaking of other parts of the SQL:2003 standard, how about one
> > > > > > section each that mentions them?  There's
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Part 4: SQL/PSM (Persistent Stored Modules)
> > > > > > Part 9: SQL/MED (Management of External Data) (my favorite)
> > > > > > Part 10: SQL/OLB (Object Language Binding)
> > > > > > Part 11: SQL/Schemata
> > > > > > Part 13: SQL/JRT (Java Routines and Types)
> > > > > 
> > > > > I don't know anything about them.
> > > > 
> > > > We claim SQL standard compliance, so since those are part of
> > > > SQL:2003, we probably ought to mention them.  SQL/PSM is a
> > > > programming language that lives inside the database, and DB2 and
> > > > MySQL have it.  SQL/MED lets people talk to other data stores.
> > > > SQL/OLB appears to be derived from equel, which we have as ecpg.
> > > > SQL/Schemata contains the information schema.  SQL/JRT appears to
> > > > bear some similarity to PL/Java and PL/J.
> > > 
> > > I think the big question is whether we are ever going to implement
> > > these?  I think we need to decide that before I mention them.
> > 
> > The SQL/Schemata thing is already in.  I think we should at least
> 
> Uh, what is the SQL/Schemata?  Are you sure it is in CVS?

It contains the information schema, among other things.  We've had the
information schema for awhile. :)

> > mention which features that we already have are from what part of
> > the standard.  As far as the rest of the standard goes, we might
> > want to mention whether we've even considered any of each piece in
> > the TODO list, and what sub-pieces, if any, are already
> > included/scheduled/too silly to contemplate :)
> 
> Well, this seems like something that belongs in our chapter on how
> we support the SQL standard.

I'm not too fussy about where it first goes in.  Just *that* it goes
in somewhere.  I'll be happy to start the needed patches. :)

Cheers,
D
-- 
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778        AIM: dfetter666
                              Skype: davidfetter

Remember to vote!

In response to

Responses

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2006-08-26 17:31:20
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New XML section for documentation
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2006-08-26 17:16:06
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New XML section for documentation

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2006-08-26 17:31:20
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New XML section for documentation
Previous:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2006-08-26 17:21:49
Subject: Re: Adding fulldisjunctions to the contrib

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group