| From: | "Jeff Cave" <jeff(dot)cave(at)sunergon(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tony" <tony(at)unihost(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "Alex Satrapa" <alex(at)lintelsys(dot)com(dot)au>, "Mike Nolan" <nolan(at)gw(dot)tssi(dot)com>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Any commercial shopping cart packages using postgresql? |
| Date: | 2003-12-15 16:11:02 |
| Message-ID: | 9BE513B2F04D124BAB5AE21F6EF4279F010C1196@owa.alias.sunergon.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> When they did the port, did they also "do the right thing" with foriegn
> keys, stored procs, etc?
No. The pg port was an unofficial thing and appears to be very much in its infancy. The objective of the individual who wrote it was to "get it working". While I haven't looked too closely at the port, I am fairly certain that there is not a single foreign key defined in the database. The one thing added, that is not available in the mySQL version is indexes. Certain indexes have been defined to speed up product searches.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-12-15 16:25:41 | Re: [GENERAL] Reordering results for a report |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-12-15 16:04:32 | Re: password authentication failed for .. |