>> Please, please, no! I_S != storage engine > > The actual interface supplied to an I_S would not be the SE interface. It > would be built on to the same execution path though (unlike the current > solution which has its own execution path).
Why not *actually make it a set of views* instead of "pretending" it's a set of views. I know of one other open-source database whose initials stand for PostgreSQL that (I've been told) implements I_S as a set of views. Nothing special about them -- just normal views, as I understand it. (This is easy to verify or disprove, but I'm lazy). _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
