| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | elein <elein(at)varlena(dot)com> |
| Cc: | postgresql advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [SQL] SQL Spec Compliance Questions |
| Date: | 2004-06-04 19:20:47 |
| Message-ID: | 200406041220.47452.josh@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-sql |
Elein,
> In postgres and Illustra, references were possible.
> That is, storing the OID (REF) of a table in a column of another
> table achieving the same effect. SQL syntax support
> was needed for the REF type. I believe this was removed
> or suppressed in PostgreSQL.
Yeah, I'd like to see a return of table references as FKs. It would allow me
to eliminate all of these rather non-relational integer-based surrogate keys.
I don't think our OIDs would be the way to go on this, given the problems
already discussed with PG OIDs. I kinda like SyBase's solution, where they
have a system-acessable hash key of the data in the row.
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rick Gigger | 2004-06-04 19:28:07 | Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] Slony-I goes BETA |
| Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 2004-06-04 19:20:36 | Re: Perpetuating the myth...annoying |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rein Petersen | 2004-06-04 19:37:41 | ANSI SQL-99 SYNTAX and "WITH" |
| Previous Message | elein | 2004-06-04 18:33:16 | Re: [SQL] SQL Spec Compliance Questions |