| From: | Chris Bitmead <chris(at)bitmead(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
| Cc: | Chris Bitmead <chrisb(at)nimrod(dot)itg(dot)telstra(dot)com(dot)au>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Thus spoke SQL3 (on OO) |
| Date: | 2000-05-22 20:04:19 |
| Message-ID: | 392992C3.9DFC0F31@bitmead.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hannu Krosing wrote:
> it would be hard to define RI by just saying that some field references "an
> OID",
> often you want to be able do define something more specific.
>
> It would be too much for most users to require that all primary and foreign
> keys
> must be of type OID.
Since it would be object and relational, you could do either. But all
pure object databases _always_ rely on oid to define relationships, and
that is likely to be all an ODMG inteface would support. Unless we want
to break new ground anyway.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Murad Nayal | 2000-05-22 20:53:07 | Re: [BUGS] port v7.0 to SGI-IRIX-6.5.7/64 |
| Previous Message | Chris Bitmead | 2000-05-22 19:44:41 | Re: Thus spoke SQL3 (on OO) |