James Harper <[email protected]> writes: >> There's some behaviour that is probably safe to ignore. I'd look at >> things around data types though, there's some corner cases with dates, >> times, IIRC DECIMAL/float things that may/may not translate well, and >> apps may/may not care about. >> > > Postgres is highly extensible. I wrote compatible types for my mssql emulator > to avoid exactly that problem (being Microsoft, they have their own ideas of > how types should behave, and also I could make the underlying data format > compatible with the wire format). > > I'd be doing a complete parse and rewrite of the language though, so any of > the language and type differences would be easily solvable. Some of the other > differences your links highlight around foreign key and atomicity behaviour > would be harder.
Actually, reading this week's LWN reminded me that PostgreSQL (up until the just-went-alpha 9.5) had no equivalent to the MySQL INSERT .... ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE syntax - what's known as UPSERT in postgresql circles. -- Stewart Smith
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
