| From: | Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Deasey <stephen(at)bollocks(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Why is MySQL more chosen over PostgreSQL |
| Date: | 2002-08-04 06:41:21 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.NEB.4.44.0208041540260.12724-100000@angelic.cynic.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 29 Jul 2002, Stephen Deasey wrote:
> Table inheritance offers data model extensibility. New (derived) tables
> can be added to the system, and will work with existing code that
> opperates on the base tables, without having to hack up all the code.
And why does this not work with the standard relational mechanism?
(Where a "derived table" would be just another table with a foreign
key pointing back to the base table.)
cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2002-08-04 06:44:47 | pgsql-server/src include/utils/timestamp.h bac ... |
| Previous Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2002-08-04 06:26:38 | pgsql-server/src backend/tcop/postgres.c backe ... |