Re: [HACKERS] Creating temp tables inside read only transactions

From: Darren Duncan <darren(at)darrenduncan(dot)net>
To: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Nolan <htfoot(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, mike beeper <mbeeper(at)hotmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Creating temp tables inside read only transactions
Date: 2011-07-11 05:08:02
Message-ID: 4E1A8532.1090707@darrenduncan.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Christopher Browne wrote:
> Vis-a-vis the attempt to do nested naming, that is "ns1.ns2.table1",
> there's a pretty good reason NOT to support that, namely that this
> breaks relational handling of tables. PostgreSQL is a *relational*
> database system, hence it's preferable for structures to be
> relational, as opposed to hierarchical, which is what any of the
> suggested nestings are.

I won't argue with whether or not nested naming is a good idea, but I will argue
with your other comment about breaking relational handling.

A relational database is a database in which all data is kept in relation-typed
variables, which SQL calls tables, and you can perform all queries and updates
with just relation-valued expressions and statements.

Organizing the tables into a multi-level namespace, either fixed-depth or
variable-depth, rather than using a flat namespace, does not make the database
any less relational, because the above definition and any others still hold.

The "less relational" argument above is a red herring or distraction. One can
argue against namespace nesting just fine without saying that.

-- Darren Duncan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Adarsh Sharma 2011-07-11 05:14:59 Schema for Website Comments
Previous Message 赵伟宇 2011-07-11 04:54:02 Fw: Re: [BUGS] BUG #6099: Does pgcluster support hibernate?

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2011-07-11 05:41:15 Re: Select For Update and Left Outer Join
Previous Message Christopher Browne 2011-07-11 04:19:12 Re: [HACKERS] Creating temp tables inside read only transactions