john huttley wrote: > > I believe we are adding Oracle compatibility as possible. We are > > working on write-ahead log, long tuples, foreign keys, and outer joins. > > Anything else? > > Yes, earlier in the year I was trying to migrate from Pervasive SQL to > posgtres and > came to a screaming halt when it wouldn't do a large view. Exceeded some > sort of internal buffer > or rule area. I dont recall the details, although the mail archive will have > it. This will be fixed by Jan's new compressed type and the long fields in a second table. So in about 6 months time. The one we still need is views on UNION's... Adriaan ************
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Bruce Momjian
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Ed Loehr
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Marc G. Fournier
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of Postgr... Ed Loehr
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Marten Feldtmann
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Clark C. Evans
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Bruce Momjian
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Clark C. Evans
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL john huttley
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Bruce Momjian
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Adriaan Joubert
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Howie
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Karel Zak - Zakkr
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Charles Tassell
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Marc G. Fournier
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Lamar Owen
- PostgreSQL Portable Runtime (was Re: [GENERAL] Future of... Robert
- PostgreSQL Portable Runtime (was Re: [GENERAL] Future of... Robert