Re: Frames vs partitions: is SQL2008 completely insane?

From: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>
To: Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Frames vs partitions: is SQL2008 completely insane?
Date: 2008-12-27 18:32:10
Message-ID: 495674AA.8050706@cheapcomplexdevices.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hitoshi Harada wrote:
> 2008/12/28 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
>> "Hitoshi Harada" <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> 2008/12/27 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
>>>> which doesn't conform to spec AFAICS ...
>>> ....4.15...says:
>> interesting...6.10 general rule 1b, which very clearly states ...
>> ... 4.15 does seem like evidence that the spec authors may
>> have misspoke in 6.10
> Oracle... results are: ... which means the section 4.15 is true

ISTM ISO should hire you guys (or the postgres project as a whole)
to proof-read their specs before they publish them.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Chernow 2008-12-27 18:50:13 Re: new libpq SSL connection option
Previous Message Hitoshi Harada 2008-12-27 16:19:31 Re: Frames vs partitions: is SQL2008 completely insane?