Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL
От | Don Baccus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3.0.1.32.20000203073928.00fc2ec0@mail.pacifier.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] Proposed Changes to PostgreSQL (Chris Bitmead <chrisb@nimrod.itg.telstra.com.au>) |
Список | pgsql-sql |
At 04:38 PM 2/3/00 +1100, Chris Bitmead wrote: >Don Baccus wrote: >> On the other hand, as someone who once made his living off his >> designed and implemented optimizing multi-language, multi-platform >> compiler technology...is it entirely out of the question to >> consider more greatly abstracting the language (gram.y/analyze.c) >> and backend (optimizer and executor) interfaces so more than one >> front-end could exist (even if only in experimental and research >> environments)? Along with front-end specific versions of libpq? > >A good thought, but we still need one good front end that supports >all the features. I wasn't think in terms of this being mutually exclusive with your desires. Merely raising up the notion that the possibility exists of creating a sandbox, so to speak, for people to play in, a tool for the exploration of such concepts. >> Nor mine, in fact the stuff I've seen about primitive OO in databases >> make me thing the folks just don't get it. >> >> Not to mention that I'm not convinced that "getting it" is worth it. OO >> fits some paradigms, not others, when programming in the large. > >Well, the features I'm talking about don't affect you unless you want >OO. No, and I wasn't arguing that you shouldn't move forward, either. I was just stating my personal opinion regarding the utility of simple OO-ish features, that's all. >> One reason I raise the issue of possible multiple front-ends (or making >> it easy for folks to make there own by making the parser->optimizer/backend >> interface more general) is that this whole area would seem to be one >> that begs for RESEARCH and experimentalism. > >No research is required. I simply want to implement the ODMG STANDARD >for ODBMS databases on PostgreSQL. There are no great design issues >here, >just a matter of nailing down the details so that everyone can live >with them. Well...that's sorta like saying no research into procedural language design is needed 'cause now we've got C++. Whether or not the existing standard for ODBMS is the greatest thing since sliced bread, I find it hard to believe that no research is required or design issues raised by the fundamental problems of database technology. Maybe I'm wrong, though, maybe the problem's been solved. - Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza@pacifier.com> Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest Rare Bird Alert Serviceand other goodies at http://donb.photo.net.
В списке pgsql-sql по дате отправления: