> Jeremy, I can't post every time you assume your use-case is everyone > else's.... could you please consider this possibility? Otherwise the > Sequel group gets tagged as steering some into a (currently) dead end > - postgreSQL ;)
I don't assume my use case is everyone's. It's possible that PostgreSQL sucks more than MySQL at some things. Most of the time when I mention to someone to try a database that sucks less, I do so because they are running into an problem with the database they are currently using (usually MySQL). The reason I do this is because most MySQL users simply use MySQL because that's what everyone uses, instead of because that's what is best for the job. It's my opinion that in most cases, PostgreSQL is the better choice. People who know that MySQL is a better choice for them aren't going to be swayed by my rhetoric. Anyone who is unsure is probably better off with PostgreSQL. In the case of this thread, the OP wants updateable views on a database that apparently doesn't support them. This, frankly, is a recipe for disaster. The better solution is to use a database that supports the use case you desire. While I don't have much experience with PostgreSQL's rule system, from what I know I believe it covers the OP's use case fairly well. Implying PostgreSQL is a dead end is ironic, considering all of the MySQL key developers that have left recently, while PostgreSQL development is going well. Jeremy --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sequel-talk" 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/sequel-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
