Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: PROPOSAL of xmlvalidate

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomáš Pospíšil <killteck(at)seznam(dot)cz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, chmelab(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL of xmlvalidate
Date: 2010-11-29 17:56:03
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 11/29/2010 12:36 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Pavel Stehule<pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>  wrote:
>> 2010/11/29 Robert Haas<robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>>> On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 5:33 AM, Tomáš Pospíšil<killteck(at)seznam(dot)cz>  wrote:
>>>> I have idea of creating system table for holding DTDs, XSDs, Relax-NGs (similar as on ORACLE).
>>>> Is that good idea?
>>> I doubt it.  Why would we want to do that?
>> If I understand, it allows a local copy of DTD, .. so then is possible
>> to provide a fast DTD checking.
> But that could equally well be stored in a user table rather than a
> system table.

Yeah. The trouble is you won't be able to use that reliably in a check 
constraint, which I imagine is one of the principal intended purposes. 
I'm not sure how we should go about that.



In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-11-29 18:10:07
Subject: Re: profiling connection overhead
Previous:From: Pavel StehuleDate: 2010-11-29 17:53:18
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL of xmlvalidate

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group