> I mean certainly Oracle or DB2 can not be compatible with this partially > implemented version of domains? > Or can they?
It depends on usage scenario. As you said if they were used just as simple check constraints in oracle they will work under h2 too. > I hope you guys don't find it intimidating here that I am talking out > loud my observations and related thoughts. I think your observations are useful and I agree that domains should be implemented in a right way. On 8 сен, 21:15, Rami Ojares <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think current implementation can satisfy needs of many developers > > (for example for postgres applications compatibility) so there is no > > reason to remove it. Still as a developer which seriously using H2 you > > are allways welcome to submit patch with better implementation if you > > dislike current ;) > > Certainly. > I do not wish make changes that are backward incompatible. > But shouldn't this behaviour be part of Postgres compatibility mode? > I mean certainly Oracle or DB2 can not be compatible with this partially > implemented version of domains? > Or can they? > > And thanks for reminding me about the possiblity to contribute code. > In the future I might. > But I haven't truly decided yet which database I will choose as my > development target. > I am hovering between derby, h2 and hssqldb. > > Currently I am in the learning phase of basic usage scenarios with H2. > I hope you guys don't find it intimidating here that I am talking out > loud my observations and related thoughts. > No one should feel obliged to do anything about them. > One can even skip reading based on the title or first 2 sentences... > > - Rami -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "H2 Database" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/h2-database?hl=en.
