| From: | Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)myrealbox(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, webb <wwsprague(at)ucdavis(dot)edu>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Data version idea (please discuss) |
| Date: | 2004-08-06 09:46:42 |
| Message-ID: | 8592DBDC-E78D-11D8-B87D-000A95C88220@myrealbox.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Mike
Thanks for the links! I remember coming across a TimeCenter paper. The
TimeCenter reference page is quite extensive and I look forward to
reading more of the work Darwen and Date critiqued.
On Aug 6, 2004, at 6:37 PM, Mike Mascari wrote:
> Partial indexes get me close to where I want with temporal features. I
> just wish the RI constraints had the ability to supply a WHERE clause.
> Between the two, it might get me were I want, rather than having to
> write triggers to ensure temporal integrity.
Would you mind going into more depth into how you're doing this?
Michael Glaesemann
grzm myrealbox com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gaetano Mendola | 2004-08-06 10:01:12 | Re: getting dead locks with 2 functions |
| Previous Message | Mike Mascari | 2004-08-06 09:37:27 | Re: Data version idea (please discuss) |