Hi,

For PostgreSQL We tend to use the Phrase
"Most Advanced Open Source RDBMS" alot.

Will this statement still hold true when/if
Inprise becomes open source ?

Jeff

======================================================
Jeff MacDonald
	jeff@pgsql.com	irc: bignose on EFnet
======================================================


Tue, 15 Feb 2000 10:42:10 -0400 (AST)
"Jeff MacDonald <jeff@pgsql.com>" <jeffm@pgsql.com>
Most Advanced
"Jeff MacDonald " wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> For PostgreSQL We tend to use the Phrase
> "Most Advanced Open Source RDBMS" alot.
> 
> Will this statement still hold true when/if
> Inprise becomes open source ?

Now that's a good question.  If we rephrase our tag to:
"Most Advanced Open Source ORDBMS" it's not a problem.

However, it really depends upon what apects in which we consider
ourselves to be the "Most Advanced" -- what is "Advanced" in that
context?  Are we advanced in terms of features, or are we advanced in
terms of our development process? I believe we are advanced in both
regards -- and we're certainly the most advanced when it comes to
maturity of development in an open source fashion -- advanced in age in
that context.

Until InterBase is released open source, it remains to be seen how
advanced of an open source database it will be.

--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11

Tue, 15 Feb 2000 10:50:17 -0500
Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org>
Re: [HACKERS] Most Advanced
> Hi,
> 
> For PostgreSQL We tend to use the Phrase
> "Most Advanced Open Source RDBMS" alot.
> 
> Will this statement still hold true when/if
> Inprise becomes open source ?
> 

That is my statement originally because we weren't getting good press. 
Yes, I don't think Inprise will match us at all.  Our Object-Relational
features will keep s as most advanced for the foreseeable future.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

Tue, 15 Feb 2000 10:50:59 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] Most Advanced
> Now that's a good question.  If we rephrase our tag to:
> "Most Advanced Open Source ORDBMS" it's not a problem.
> 
> However, it really depends upon what apects in which we consider
> ourselves to be the "Most Advanced" -- what is "Advanced" in that
> context?  Are we advanced in terms of features, or are we advanced in
> terms of our development process? I believe we are advanced in both
> regards -- and we're certainly the most advanced when it comes to
> maturity of development in an open source fashion -- advanced in age in
> that context.
> 
> Until InterBase is released open source, it remains to be seen how
> advanced of an open source database it will be.

Is Interbase any good?  I never heard of them much.  Sounds like it is a
PC database like dbase, right?  They don't scale very well.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

Tue, 15 Feb 2000 11:01:36 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] Most Advanced
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Until InterBase is released open source, it remains to be seen how
> > advanced of an open source database it will be.
 
> Is Interbase any good?  I never heard of them much.  Sounds like it is a
> PC database like dbase, right?  They don't scale very well.

Well, rummaging around the interbase.com website, I found an
introductory whitepaper that lists their features.  Check
http://www.interbase.com/downloads/what_is_ib.pdf for more info.

It seems to be an interesting system. To summarize its features (going
quickly against the PDF referenced above):
Client-server architecture;
SQL parser in server;
Server side triggers;
Stored Procedures;
User-defined functions;
Event alerters (that notify clients of database changes);
Declarative Referential Integrity with cascading operations;
Domains and contstraints extend SQL types;
Automatic two-phase commit to stabilize distributed mulit-database
transactions;
Cross-platform scalability and interoperability;
Small footprint (3MB disk for minimum, ~20MB for full install)
Up to 150 concurrent clients;
Y2K correct;
Implements entry level SQL-92, plus many intermediate level features and
selected features from the full level;
InterBase Corp has voting member status in the ANSI SQL standards
committee, X3H2;
SQL Roles for group-level security;
SQL-92 syntax for inner and outer JOIN clauses;
Views on tables and joins;
Select procedures (that return not a value, but a result set);
Full transactional operation;
MultiGenerational Architecture (basically the same as our MVCC);
Row-level locking;
Multiple concurrent transactions on a per-client basis -- each client
can have multiple concurrent transactions;
Distributed transactions -- a single transaction can be open against
multiple databases, with a two-phase commit;
BLOBs;
Arrays (implemented as structured BLOBs);
BLOB filter functions (such as a JPEG to PNG translator);
Cost-analysis query optimization;
On Unix systems, the InterBase security can be integrated with OS
security;
Internationalization support, including UNICODE;
Integration with Borland JBuilder;
ODBC client;
Automatic garbage collection -- no vacuum;
No preallocation of disk space required -- files up to 4GB in size, with
expansion through the use of secondary files (similar to our
segmentation);
Full ACID compliance.

That's the short version.

I don't see stuff like:
Ability to use Tcl and Perl in stored procedural functions;
Object Relational in nature;
Endlessly extensible for types, languages, functions, etc.  (I
especially like that one).

And other features of PostgreSQL that we know and love. Nor do I see as
many supported architectures.

--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11

Tue, 15 Feb 2000 11:48:06 -0500
Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org>
Re: [HACKERS] Most Advanced
On Tue, 15 Feb 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Is Interbase any good?  I never heard of them much.  Sounds like it is a
> PC database like dbase, right?  They don't scale very well.

"InterBase is an enterprise-level database system used by firms and
agencies like Nokia, MCI, Northern Telecom, NASA, the US Army, and Boeing.
Despite its speed and capabilities, it has been a well-kept secret and
holds an insignificant share of the relational database market. Growth of
that market has slowed, reducing chance for InterBase to increase its
share as a proprietary product."

Although they do stand in the tradition of dBase and Paradox, they do
appear to be a serious product. This URL might give you an idea what kind
of SQL (and beyond) they support.

<http://www.interbase.com/products/dsqlsyntax.html>

Also, they seem to have an edge (against us) in the areas of logging
(journaling) and distributed stuff. Their client languages seem to
concentrate around Delphi, C++, and Java.

I am just wondering how/whether they will be able to enlist any outside
developers in significant masses. (see also Mozilla)

-- 
Peter Eisentraut                  Sernanders vaeg 10:115
peter_e@gmx.net                   75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/            Sweden



Tue, 15 Feb 2000 18:36:20 +0100 (MET)
Peter Eisentraut <e99re41@DoCS.UU.SE>
Re: [HACKERS] Most Advanced
Lamar Owen wrote:
> 
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Until InterBase is released open source, it remains to be seen how
> > > advanced of an open source database it will be.
> 
> > Is Interbase any good?  I never heard of them much.  Sounds like it is a
> > PC database like dbase, right?  They don't scale very well.

IIRC it was missing shared cache between backends. 
 
> It seems to be an interesting system. To summarize its features (going
> quickly against the PDF referenced above):

I try putting a + or - based on weather PG has it (please correct me)

+> Client-server architecture;
+> SQL parser in server;
+> Server side triggers;
+> Stored Procedures;
+> User-defined functions;
+> Event alerters (that notify clients of database changes);

Actually or LISTEN/NOTIFY would could use some improvement, it would be 
much more powerful if it allowed even a single argument to be passed.

+> Declarative Referential Integrity with cascading operations;

Will be in 7.0 ?

-> Domains and contstraints extend SQL types;
?> Automatic two-phase commit to stabilize distributed mulit-database
   transactions;
+> Cross-platform scalability and interoperability;
+> Small footprint (3MB disk for minimum, ~20MB for full install)

PG should be about the same size

+> Up to 150 concurrent clients;

What is the upper limit for PG ?

+> Y2K correct;
+> Implements entry level SQL-92, plus many intermediate level features and
   selected features from the full level;
-> InterBase Corp has voting member status in the ANSI SQL standards
   committee, X3H2;

Is this the bunch of guys we often fondly remember for their SQL3 standard ?

-> SQL Roles for group-level security;

+> SQL-92 syntax for inner and outer JOIN clauses;

Will be in 7.0 ?

+> Views on tables and joins;
-> Select procedures (that return not a value, but a result set);

This requires a rewrite of the pl function API

+> Full transactional operation;
+> MultiGenerational Architecture (basically the same as our MVCC);
?> Row-level locking;

How are we doing here ?

?> Multiple concurrent transactions on a per-client basis -- each client
  can have multiple concurrent transactions;

If client==connection, then we don't have it, if we opened a connection per
trx we do

-> Distributed transactions -- a single transaction can be open against
  multiple databases, with a two-phase commit;

Support for multi-db is generally weak in PG. A single connction can work only 
with one db at a time

+> BLOBs;

We have LOs, but the implementation is nut usable for more than a few on 
most UNIX filesystems (we have one LO per file, all in the same directory with 
everything else)

+> Arrays (implemented as structured BLOBs);

But nut implemented as structured BLOBS ;)

+> BLOB filter functions (such as a JPEG to PNG translator);

Could be done easily, but not included in distribution at least.

+> Cost-analysis query optimization;
+> On Unix systems, the InterBase security can be integrated with OS
  security;
+> Internationalization support, including UNICODE;

Do we have UNICODE (or just several other MB charsets)?

-> Integration with Borland JBuilder;

No intgration but can be used from it

+> ODBC client;
-> Automatic garbage collection -- no vacuum;

Implementing it to be _fully_ automatic would make it very hard to 
re-introduce time travel.

We have it semi-automatic using psql -c "vacuum;" in cron ;-p

+> No preallocation of disk space required -- files up to 4GB in size, with
   expansion through the use of secondary files (similar to our
   segmentation);
+> Full ACID compliance.
> 
> That's the short version.
> 
> I don't see stuff like:
+> Ability to use Tcl and Perl in stored procedural functions;
-> Object Relational in nature;

Maybe we should rephrase it to "Object Relational by ancestry".
We have very few OR features currently in working order, and 
probably won't before 7.1. Chris Bitmead has patches for making 
inherited tables work right (for SELECT,DELETE,UPDATE), but 
they won't probably be included in 7.0 as they change the behaviour 
of the only statment (SELECT) that is currently working to some extent
and some of the core developers seem to be dependent on the old 
behaviour, i.e using inheritance as a shortcut for including the 
same set of columns in an unrelated table. 
Also people were set back by SQL3 standard which pg should (?) follow 
to some extent at least, but which is incomprehensible when read 
directly and which can only be understood through the works 
of apostles ;)

+> Endlessly extensible for types, languages, functions, etc.  (I
  especially like that one).

Otoh, they have implemented DOMAINS, which allow much of simpler types to 
be done at SQL level. They won't probably be indexable.

-------------------
Hannu

Tue, 15 Feb 2000 20:04:55 +0200
Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee>
Re: [HACKERS] Most Advanced
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> > Is Interbase any good?  I never heard of them much.  Sounds like it is a
> > PC database like dbase, right?  They don't scale very well.
> 
> "InterBase is an enterprise-level database system used by firms and
> agencies like Nokia, MCI, Northern Telecom, NASA, the US Army, and Boeing.
> Despite its speed and capabilities, it has been a well-kept secret and
> holds an insignificant share of the relational database market. Growth of
> that market has slowed, reducing chance for InterBase to increase its
> share as a proprietary product."
> 
> Although they do stand in the tradition of dBase and Paradox, they do
> appear to be a serious product. This URL might give you an idea what kind
> of SQL (and beyond) they support.
> 
> <http://www.interbase.com/products/dsqlsyntax.html>
> 
> Also, they seem to have an edge (against us) in the areas of logging
> (journaling) and distributed stuff. Their client languages seem to
> concentrate around Delphi, C++, and Java.
> 
> I am just wondering how/whether they will be able to enlist any outside
> developers in significant masses. (see also Mozilla)

Yes, that is a key question.  I know Solaris got criticized about over
their new "Solaris" open-source license, and I heard the
Monzilla/Netscape code was so ugly that the open source effort is going
very slowly.

Honestly, a big part of success is atmosphere and code structure. 
Without both of those, it is pretty slow going.  It is hard to imagine
how anyone would _new_ would start working on Interbase rather than
PostgreSQL because of our good reputation.

Also, Corel bough Inprise/Borland, so there is no way of knowing what
will happen with Interbase now.  I just heard that the new WordPerfect
Office will run under WINE(yuck) rather than native Linux/Unix.  That is
quite bad and a clear failure for Corel IMHO.  Corel doesn't seem to be
very good at enlisting assistance in open source projects.  The
developed their _own_ version of WINE to get Word Perfect Office out the
door, and they say they will merge their changes in "later" to main WINE
distribution.  Their WINE source is accessible, though.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

Tue, 15 Feb 2000 15:18:14 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] Most Advanced
On Tue, 15 Feb 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Also, Corel bough Inprise/Borland, so there is no way of knowing what
> will happen with Interbase now.  I just heard that the new WordPerfect
> Office will run under WINE(yuck) rather than native Linux/Unix.  That
> is quite bad and a clear failure for Corel IMHO.  Corel doesn't seem
> to be very good at enlisting assistance in open source projects.  The
> developed their _own_ version of WINE to get Word Perfect Office out
> the door, and they say they will merge their changes in "later" to
> main WINE distribution.  Their WINE source is accessible, though.

Actually, I think you might be looking at this wrong ... figure that Corel
is putting resources into making WINE a viable "engine" to running
Micro$loth applications ... WINE is open source.  

Now, which is better/easier?  Re-code Wordperfect Office (one app) to run
natively, or improve an open source application so that Linux/Unix can run
any existing Micro$loth product?  Which is cheaper in the long run?

If they were starting WordPerfect from scratch, okay ... but how many
hundreds of thousands of lines of Windoze specific code is in
WP-Office? :)

Marc G. Fournier                   ICQ#7615664               IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org 


Tue, 15 Feb 2000 17:12:17 -0400 (AST)
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
Re: [HACKERS] Most Advanced
> Actually, I think you might be looking at this wrong ... figure that Corel
> is putting resources into making WINE a viable "engine" to running
> Micro$loth applications ... WINE is open source.  
> 
> Now, which is better/easier?  Re-code Wordperfect Office (one app) to run
> natively, or improve an open source application so that Linux/Unix can run
> any existing Micro$loth product?  Which is cheaper in the long run?
> 
> If they were starting WordPerfect from scratch, okay ... but how many
> hundreds of thousands of lines of Windoze specific code is in
> WP-Office? :)

I have never been very confident about emulation of any form.  Also, if
Corel has Inprise and Corel Linux, you would think it would be worth
making the port to a _real_ operating system.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

Tue, 15 Feb 2000 16:18:31 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] Most Advanced
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> > Actually, I think you might be looking at this wrong ... figure that Corel
> > is putting resources into making WINE a viable "engine" to running
> > Micro$loth applications ... WINE is open source.
> >
> > Now, which is better/easier?  Re-code Wordperfect Office (one app) to run
> > natively, or improve an open source application so that Linux/Unix can run
> > any existing Micro$loth product?  Which is cheaper in the long run?
> >
> > If they were starting WordPerfect from scratch, okay ... but how many
> > hundreds of thousands of lines of Windoze specific code is in
> > WP-Office? :)
> 
> I have never been very confident about emulation of any form.  Also, if
> Corel has Inprise and Corel Linux, you would think it would be worth
> making the port to a _real_ operating system.

AFAIIC they are just using WINE as their cross-platform toolkit, same as
Mozilla 
does with theirs XPCOM (or whatever it's called;).
I don't see any of the GUI toolkits as basically better than others (though I 
have used lately wxPython).
And cross-platform is important nowadays - even in my small company there are 
developers using Linux,BeOS,Win32 and Macs and it is counterproductive if we 
have to use some important tool that isnt available for some platform or can't 
be run remotely (over http/html or X11)

---------------
Hannu

Wed, 16 Feb 2000 00:04:54 +0200
Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee>
Re: [HACKERS] Most Advanced
* Jeff MacDonald <jeff@pgsql.com> <jeffm@pgsql.com> [000215 07:33] wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> For PostgreSQL We tend to use the Phrase
> "Most Advanced Open Source RDBMS" alot.
> 
> Will this statement still hold true when/if
> Inprise becomes open source ?

Depending on the license it could become 
"Most Advanced Really Open Source RDBMS"

And who says that it will actually be more advanced?

-Alfred

Tue, 15 Feb 2000 14:23:53 -0800
Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
Re: [HACKERS] Most Advanced
On Wed, Feb 16, 2000 at 12:04:54AM +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > 
> > > Actually, I think you might be looking at this wrong ... figure that Corel
> > > is putting resources into making WINE a viable "engine" to running
> > > Micro$loth applications ... WINE is open source.
> > >
> > > Now, which is better/easier?  Re-code Wordperfect Office (one app) to run
> > > natively, or improve an open source application so that Linux/Unix can run
> > > any existing Micro$loth product?  Which is cheaper in the long run?
> > >
> > > If they were starting WordPerfect from scratch, okay ... but how many
> > > hundreds of thousands of lines of Windoze specific code is in
> > > WP-Office? :)
> > 
> > I have never been very confident about emulation of any form.  Also, if
> > Corel has Inprise and Corel Linux, you would think it would be worth
> > making the port to a _real_ operating system.
> 
> AFAIIC they are just using WINE as their cross-platform toolkit, same as
> Mozilla 
> does with theirs XPCOM (or whatever it's called;).
> I don't see any of the GUI toolkits as basically better than others (though I 
> have used lately wxPython).
> And cross-platform is important nowadays - even in my small company there are 
> developers using Linux,BeOS,Win32 and Macs and it is counterproductive if we 
> have to use some important tool that isnt available for some platform or can't 
> be run remotely (over http/html or X11)

I've been following WINE development longer than PostgreSQL, so I
think I should comment on this. Hannu's exactly right: WINE Is Not
an Emulator, it's an implementation of the Win32 API on top of Unix/X
(well, mostly Linux, but they do occasionally get someone testing on
*BSD). Given that, there _is_ a second component: implementation of
the Win32 ABI. This is the wine executable that sometimes gets called
the "emulator". The API implementation requires recompiling your Win32
targeted code - this is a 'winlib' app. The wine executable knows all
about loading Windows format binaries, so you can run Windows _binaries_
directly. Such a clean distinction didn't really exist, at first. Since
_most_ Windows programs that people wanted to run where binary only,
and the idea that companies might actually recompile their code for the
Linux market (what market?) was somewhat laughed at, the WINE project
started as an ABI emulation, and only fairly recently has restructured,
to include both. The eventual goal is the the wine executable will just
be another winlib app, just like any other, it just knows how to read
a Windows binary, and do any fix-up needed.

As to Corel's work with WINE: their developers (and their contractors)
have had their own, until quite recently private, tree, but they have
been pushing patches out to the public tree on a regular basis, and
participating in design discussions on the public mailing lists. The
recent opening of their tree seems to me to have come about to alleviate
the problem of needing to push patches out, as release deadline pressures
neared. In fact, that was explicitly mentioned by one of their developers,
who invited everyone to generate patch sets and submit them to the open
tree. The use of WINE as opposed to 'native' I read as "Win32 binary"
rather than winlib, ELF binary.

Ross

-- 
Ross J. Reedstrom, Ph.D., <reedstrm@rice.edu> 
NSBRI Research Scientist/Programmer
Computer and Information Technology Institute
Rice University, 6100 S. Main St.,  Houston, TX 77005

Tue, 15 Feb 2000 16:51:27 -0600
"Ross J. Reedstrom" <reedstrm@wallace.ece.rice.edu>
Re: [HACKERS] Most Advanced
On Tue, 15 Feb 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> > Actually, I think you might be looking at this wrong ... figure that Corel
> > is putting resources into making WINE a viable "engine" to running
> > Micro$loth applications ... WINE is open source.  
> > 
> > Now, which is better/easier?  Re-code Wordperfect Office (one app) to run
> > natively, or improve an open source application so that Linux/Unix can run
> > any existing Micro$loth product?  Which is cheaper in the long run?
> > 
> > If they were starting WordPerfect from scratch, okay ... but how many
> > hundreds of thousands of lines of Windoze specific code is in
> > WP-Office? :)
> 
> I have never been very confident about emulation of any form.  Also, if
> Corel has Inprise and Corel Linux, you would think it would be worth
> making the port to a _real_ operating system.

I've gotten 4 Windoze users at work converted over to FreeBSD over the
past month or so, the latest one being as a result of VMWare ... now they
can run all their Windoze programs that they require without having to
dual-boot into Windoze when they need to ...

If the emulation is done well enough, the end result is a much broader set
of applications while still running a *good* operating system ... the blue
screen of death doesn't require rebooting a whole computer :)

Marc G. Fournier                   ICQ#7615664               IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org 


Tue, 15 Feb 2000 18:55:21 -0400 (AST)
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
Re: [HACKERS] Most Advanced
> have had their own, until quite recently private, tree, but they have
> been pushing patches out to the public tree on a regular basis, and
> participating in design discussions on the public mailing lists. The
> recent opening of their tree seems to me to have come about to alleviate
> the problem of needing to push patches out, as release deadline pressures
> neared. In fact, that was explicitly mentioned by one of their developers,
> who invited everyone to generate patch sets and submit them to the open
> tree. The use of WINE as opposed to 'native' I read as "Win32 binary"
> rather than winlib, ELF binary.

Quite interesting.  I can see a Win32 compatible library as quite handy.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

Tue, 15 Feb 2000 18:01:05 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] Most Advanced
Hi Guys,

Tim Dyck asked me to forward this on to the list.

*****************************

FYI, the story is available online at:

http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,2436153,00.html

As I think I have mentioned, I would like to review PostgreSQL 7.0 when it
goes gold, so if someone could let me know when it is available, that
would be much appreciated.

(i can handle contacting him when it comes out.)

Regards,
Tim Dyck
Senior Analyst
PC Week Labs





Thu, 17 Feb 2000 10:10:35 -0400 (AST)
"Jeff MacDonald <jeff@pgsql.com>" <jeffm@pgsql.com>
PC Week PostgreSQL benchmark results posted online (fwd)
> As I think I have mentioned, I would like to review PostgreSQL 7.0 when it
> goes gold, so if someone could let me know when it is available, that
> would be much appreciated.

A review of 7.0.1 would be a better choice ;)

                    - Thomas

-- 
Thomas Lockhart				lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California

Thu, 17 Feb 2000 14:59:40 +0000
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
Re: [HACKERS] PC Week PostgreSQL benchmark results posted online
 (fwd)
> Tim Dyck asked me to forward this on to the list.
>
> *****************************
>
> FYI, the story is available online at:
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,2436153,00.html
>
> As I think I have mentioned, I would like to review PostgreSQL 7.0 when it
> goes gold, so if someone could let me know when it is available, that
> would be much appreciated.

    And that'll be an interesting one. Just looked into the MSSQL
    7.0 docs today.  They  don't  have  referential  actions!  So
    something  like ON UPDATE CASCADE/... must be implemented the
    hard way as triggers.  Need to look it up once again tomorrow
    to see if constraints can be deferred or not.

    On  this detail, we already left at least one (and definitely
    not the smallest) commercial database behind on  the  way  to
    SQL3.

    Can someone take a look at Interbase, Oracle and others about
    it?


Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#========================================= wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) #



Thu, 17 Feb 2000 23:10:01 +0100 (CET)
wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck)
Re: [HACKERS] PC Week PostgreSQL benchmark results posted online
 (fwd)


Jan Wieck wrote:

> > Tim Dyck asked me to forward this on to the list.
> >
> > *****************************
> >
> > FYI, the story is available online at:
> >
> > http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,2436153,00.html
> >
> > As I think I have mentioned, I would like to review PostgreSQL 7.0 when it
> > goes gold, so if someone could let me know when it is available, that
> > would be much appreciated.
>
>     And that'll be an interesting one. Just looked into the MSSQL
>     7.0 docs today.  They  don't  have  referential  actions!  So
>     something  like ON UPDATE CASCADE/... must be implemented the
>     hard way as triggers.  Need to look it up once again tomorrow
>     to see if constraints can be deferred or not.
>
>     On  this detail, we already left at least one (and definitely
>     not the smallest) commercial database behind on  the  way  to
>     SQL3.
>
>     Can someone take a look at Interbase, Oracle and others about
>     it?
>
> Jan
>
> --
>

Borland Interbase 4.0 syntax:

contraint_def:
{ PRIMARY KEY | UNIQUE (col [, col...] )
| FOREIGN KEY (col [, col...])  REFERENCES other_table
| CHECK (<search_condition>)
}


--
Jose' Soares
Bologna, Italy                     Jose@sferacarta.com



Fri, 18 Feb 2000 14:47:26 +0100
Jose Soares <jose@sferacarta.com>
Re: [HACKERS] PC Week PostgreSQL benchmark results posted online
 (fwd)