| From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, andrew(at)supernews(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: plpgsql by default |
| Date: | 2006-04-11 22:35:08 |
| Message-ID: | 20060411193445.O1096@ganymede.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>> No, but does that mean we should increase the potential by adding in
>> something that not everyone that runs PostgreSQL actually uses?
>
> Using this argument I could say that we don't need primary keys, foreign
> keys, views or rules. Especially the latter 3 ;).
*slap forehead* *groan*
then again, if we could pull it out and move it into loadable modules ...
hmmmm ... >:)
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-04-11 22:43:56 | Re: plpgsql by default |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2006-04-11 22:30:33 | Re: plpgsql by default |