| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Donnacha Mac Gloinn <postgresql(dot)org(at)donnacha(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: High-Profile Advocacy Opportunity: Vbulletin Forum |
| Date: | 2004-06-17 19:14:50 |
| Message-ID: | 200406172114.50469.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 08:13:19PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Josh Berkus wrote:
> > > My personal conjecture:
> > >
> > > The "extended insert" is not on the Postgres TODO list because:
> > > a) It's not ANSI SQL standard.
> > > b) We have COPY, which is better.
> >
> > Unfortunately that statement is mostly wrong:
> > - It is on the TODO list.
> > - It is standard.
> > - It is better than COPY.
>
> Why is it better than COPY?
Because you can't insert 1+1 using COPY. There are nontrivial
extensions of that example, of course.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-06-17 20:56:31 | Re: High-Profile Advocacy Opportunity: Vbulletin Forum |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2004-06-17 18:45:49 | Re: High-Profile Advocacy Opportunity: Vbulletin Forum |