| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Copeland <greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net> |
| Cc: | Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Inheritance |
| Date: | 2002-08-14 16:05:37 |
| Message-ID: | 8850.1029341137@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Copeland <greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net> writes:
> On Tue, 2002-08-13 at 23:43, Curt Sampson wrote:
>> And I think a detailed description comes most easily when you have
>> a logical model to work from.
> I completely agree. This is why I want/wanted to pursue the theory and
> existing implementations angle.
> Seems like everyone trying to jump on "index spanning" is premature.
I agree. Table-spanning indexes would be a large, complex,
difficult-to-get-right feature. Before diving into that we should get
some idea of just how we'd actually use them, and whether that's the
only big chunk of work standing between us and a more useful inheritance
feature. I'm afraid we might do all that effort and then discover there
are other showstoppers.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Lamar Owen | 2002-08-14 16:06:52 | Re: regression test failure |
| Previous Message | Lamar Owen | 2002-08-14 15:55:55 | Re: OOP real life example (was Re: Why is MySQL more |