| From: | Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)myrealbox(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, webb <wwsprague(at)ucdavis(dot)edu>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Data version idea (please discuss) |
| Date: | 2004-08-06 09:37:27 |
| Message-ID: | 41135157.10902@mascari.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Michael Glaesemann wrote:
> From what I gather, the SQL TSQL2 discussions ended without any
> conclusion as to extending SQL in this direction.
Darwen's critique of TSQL2 is here:
http://www.hughdarwen.freeola.com/TheThirdManifesto.web/OnTSQL2.pdf
I'm not sure if Snodgrass ever replied to it.
The working draft's Part 7 was SQL/Temporal:
There's a bunch of temporal related doucments from the TimeCenter:
http://www.cs.auc.dk/TimeCenter/pub.htm
Partial indexes get me close to where I want with temporal features.
I just wish the RI constraints had the ability to supply a WHERE
clause. Between the two, it might get me were I want, rather than
having to write triggers to ensure temporal integrity.
Mike Mascari
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Glaesemann | 2004-08-06 09:46:42 | Re: Data version idea (please discuss) |
| Previous Message | Amir Zicherman | 2004-08-06 09:04:49 | Re: getting dead locks with 2 functions |