Re: Proposal: temporal extension "period" data type

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal: temporal extension "period" data type
Date: 2008-05-26 10:49:03
Message-ID: 483A959F.5040502@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jeff Davis wrote:
> During PGCon 2008, several people encouraged me to submit the code for
> inclusion in the core.
>
> The advantages of including it in core are that some features can't be
> done from pgfoundry, such as:
> * temporal foreign keys
> * temporal joins
>

Maybe I'm being dense, but how does inclusion in core help you do these
things? Or, more precisely, how does non-inclusion in core prevent them.

> * syntax like "ALTER TABLE ... ADD LOG".
>

What does this mean?

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message ITAGAKI Takahiro 2008-05-26 11:01:50 Re: Read Uncommitted
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2008-05-26 07:02:40 Proposal: temporal extension "period" data type