uninformed in that we have not put the OO/OR features to the side, and, in
fact, have developers actively working on it ...
On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > perhaps you'd better first find an evaluation copy of informix, seems that
> > > they have more systematic and well-thought feature set.
> > >
> > > there are some historical relations between informix (esp. Object
> > > relational features) -- share the same original source code!
> > >
> > > my understanding is that more recent pg focus is to make it as a
> > > strong mission critical (i.e. "real", "industrial") relational
> > > db. so, the OO or OR features -- esp. "advanced" ones -- are kind
> > > of putting aside. so, that is why I suggest you take a look on informix
> > > first.
> >
> > this is a totally uninformed and inaccurate assessment ... the current
> > state of OO/OR features in PgSQL has been sitting pretty much on one
> > persons shoulders ... v7.0 has some extensions/fixes added in this arena,
> > and we would very much welcome anyone that wishes to work with us towards
> > further improvements on this ...
>
> it's not fair! It is understandable that you love PG, but it does not
> mean you can be blindly doing that!
>
> it is a plain fact that OR/OO features are not the focus in recent years,
> and some of them are broken or not work right, no mention of
> documentations.
> And, informix is certainly a better product in that regards! -- and I also
> emphasized the crucial advantage of PG that it is open source and people
> esp. master degree candidate can contribute and leave a good trail.
>
> -- Please tell me, why and where is this info is uninformed?!
>
>
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: [EMAIL PROTECTED] secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org
