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

Re: Frames vs partitions: is SQL2008 completely insane?

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Frames vs partitions: is SQL2008 completely insane?
Date: 2009-01-03 22:29:22
Message-ID: 200901040029.23507.peter_e@gmx.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Saturday 27 December 2008 20:32:10 Ron Mayer wrote:
> ISTM ISO should hire you guys (or the postgres project as a whole)
> to proof-read their specs before they publish them.

The way it really works though, effectively, is that vendors hire ISO to 
publish their specs.

Having a few inconsistencies in 2000 pages of language specification with 20 
years of legacy around it isn't so bad IMO, considering that there are really 
only a handful of guys working on this with any intensity.

If we cared enough, we could submit these sorts of issues to the committee for 
clarification or correction.  If anyone is convinced enough about this 
particular case, I can try to relay it and see what happens.

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2009-01-03 22:31:31
Subject: Re: dblink vs SQL/MED
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2009-01-03 22:20:10
Subject: Re: incoherent view of serializable transactions

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