Josh Berkus <email@example.com> writes:
> I think if the code is good enough, and we can avoid horrible non-standard
> syntax extensions, they should go in. We have to defend our title as "most
> advanced database" and having stuff like Skyline first (before DB2 or MS)
> goes a long way for that.
Well, whether it's horrible or not is in the eye of the beholder, but
this is certainly a non-standard syntax extension.
My questions about whether to adopt it have more to do with
cost/benefit. I haven't seen the patch, but it sounds like it will be
large and messy; and it's for a feature that nobody ever heard of before,
let alone one that the community has developed a consensus it wants.
I'm not interested in adopting stuff just "because DB2 hasn't got it".
It's also worth noting that what we've got here is a large patch
developed, by students, completely outside our normal development
process; so the odds that it's going to be anywhere near acceptable are
low. I think the last time we applied a patch that met that description
was the INTERSECT/EXCEPT patch in 1999 ... maybe you don't remember
what a fiasco that was, but I do.
Sorry to be a thrower of cold water, but I just don't see that this
comes anywhere near being something we should be eager to accept.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster