From: | Chris Bitmead <chrisb(at)nimrod(dot)itg(dot)telstra(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | Mark Hollomon <mhh(at)nortelnetworks(dot)com> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-sql(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL |
Date: | 2000-02-03 22:43:48 |
Message-ID: | 389A04A4.BC343241@nimrod.itg.telecom.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
Mark Hollomon wrote:
>
> > [ discussion on changing the default to getting subclasses ]
>
> I object.
Tell me why you object. Performance concerns? Compatibility?
A SET might be a good idea, but to decide whether and also a
default, it's good to know what the objections are.
>
> How about a set variable?
>
> SET GETSUBCLASSES = true
>
> With the '*' and ONLY being explicit overrides to the setting
> of the variable. The default would be 'false'. I would not
> object to a configuration switch that would change the
> default.
> --
>
> Mark Hollomon
> mhh(at)nortelnetworks(dot)com
> ESN 451-9008 (302)454-9008
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Chris Bitmead | 2000-02-03 22:53:33 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2000-02-03 22:38:28 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Chris Bitmead | 2000-02-03 22:48:04 | Re: AW: [HACKERS] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2000-02-03 22:38:28 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Chris Bitmead | 2000-02-03 22:53:33 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2000-02-03 22:38:28 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL |