On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 10:45 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> a table with no columns would have no primary key... doesn't that violate
> one of the fundamental tenets of the relational model ?
Not as I understand it. A relation must have at least one candidate
key. That will be the set of all the
So, let's just flat-out ask.
Dear Important People: would the PostgreSQL project consider
supporting other query languages? Or creating a plug-in mechanism for
them, so that alternative interface languages could be added without
changing the base code?
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Guyren Ho
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 2:05 AM, Guyren Howe wrote:
> If I had the time and money to put together a team to do this, I would start
> with the lower-level guts of either Postgres or SQLite (or, heck, MySQL) so
> you had a thing that did BTrees and other data structures on disk and
> indexes, and pr
Well, this hits very close to my feelings in several respects. I
don't often bring this up, because I don't generally feel like "I
loathe SQL" is quite the thing to say in a community called
"PostgreSQL". :-) Or, "I really love this project... can we change
its direction entirely?"
But yeah, th
nical details aren't promising.
I need to think through what's been said; possibly I'll have a
follow-up question or two later. At any rate, thank you both.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Rowley writes:
>> On 24 September 2015 at 13:32, Raymo
Greetings.
I love PostgreSQL's support of automatically updatable views, limited
though it is. I would like to point out what I believe is another
case where views can be updated, without ambiguity. I'm going to call
this a "foreign key view". For example, given a view V which joins a
table C w
