| From: | Erik Jones <erik(at)myemma(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: new idea |
| Date: | 2007-04-09 15:52:20 |
| Message-ID: | 1639AADD-0A98-4CEC-89DC-358216B2014E@myemma.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-sql |
On Apr 9, 2007, at 9:14 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 09:11:57AM -0500, Erik Jones wrote:
>>
>> I don't really even see the need for inheritance here. This is what
>> most ORMs do at the application level already.
>
> Wel, sure, but the poster seemed to think that having a way to
> represent this in the database was a good thing. (I'm not actually
> convinced even of that. The whole point of SQL was to move away from
> the hierarchical model, and so grafting a lot of hierarchy back onto
> it suggests to me that the OP has picked the wrong technology for the
> problem at the outset.)
You're parenthesized comments were what I was getting at. :)
erik jones <erik(at)myemma(dot)com>
software developer
615-296-0838
emma(r)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | A. Kretschmer | 2007-04-10 14:05:26 | Question about undefinably query... |
| Previous Message | Dirk Jagdmann | 2007-04-09 15:11:37 | Re: MD5 sums of large objects |