Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: grzm@myrealbox.com, hlinnaka@iki.fi, alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2005-08-27T15:26:07Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"Andrew Dunstan" <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: >>> * support for Tutorial D as an alternative to SQL. It would be great >>> for educational purposes. > This strikes me as something that belongs in a research project, not in the > core, at least for now. For better or worse, Postgres is a SQL engine; I can't imagine trying to support two different query languages at the same time. When the Berkeley guys ripped out PostQUEL and put in SQL, it was a major change, and we are *still* trying to clean up leftover baggage from having originally used a different language with different query semantics. Even if Tutorial D were the greatest thing since sliced bread, supporting it alongside SQL sounds totally impractical. (Reality check: even supporting Oracle's flavor of SQL alongside ours would be an incredible pain. Ask the EnterpriseDB guys how they're doing on that ...) regards, tom lane