| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SQL Spec Compliance Questions |
| Date: | 2004-04-02 16:53:04 |
| Message-ID: | 200404020853.04880.josh@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-sql |
Joe,
> After re-reading it, I think it is related to (or at least similar to)
> the work Tom is currently doing to allow composite types as table
> attributes.
That's what I thought at first as well, and told the requestor that we would
support them in the next two versions. But reading that paragraph makes me
think that the type is somehow supposed to contain metadata or summary data
for the table itself.
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2004-04-02 17:15:41 | Re: Aberdeen Study on OS RDBMS: exceprts and |
| Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2004-04-02 16:48:03 | Re: SQL Spec Compliance Questions |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-04-02 17:47:56 | Re: [SQL] SQL Spec Compliance Questions |
| Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2004-04-02 16:48:03 | Re: SQL Spec Compliance Questions |