On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 11:15 +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote: > I think syntax support is a good start.
I don't see a syntax-only patch as being any use at all to this community. We go to enormous lengths in other areas to never allow patches with restrictions. Why would we allow a patch that is essentially 100% restriction? i.e. It does nothing at all. Worse than that, it will encourage people to believe it exists in full, when that isn't the case. The syntax has never really been in question, so it doesn't really move us forwards in any direction. This is exactly the kind of shallow feature we have always shied away from and that other databases have encouraged. The only reason I can see is that it allows people to develop non-open source code that matches how Postgres will work when we get our act together. That seems likely to discourage, rather than encourage the funding of this work for open source. It may even muddy the water for people that don't understand that the real magic happens in the internals, not in the syntax. Why not just wait until we have a whole patch and then apply? -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
