Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: Should we drop the "object" from ORDBMS? - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: Should we drop the "object" from ORDBMS?
Date
Msg-id 1335640568.28653.89.camel@jdavis
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Should we drop the "object" from ORDBMS?  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Responses Re: Should we drop the "object" from ORDBMS?
List pgsql-advocacy
Tree view 
On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 12:48 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Um, you missed the really big one:
>
> (4) User-definable Type system, with context-sensitive operators and
> functions.
>
> It's our type system which makes us an ORDBMS.  The other things are
> largely decorations.

Again, I don't see what is particularly "object-oriented" about PG's
extensible type system.

I can see that "object-oriented" has been redefined so much that it can
mean anything. So, I suppose it doesn't hurt to leave it in the
description.

Regards,
    Jeff Davis

pgsql-advocacy by date:

Previous
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: Should we drop the "object" from ORDBMS?
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Should we drop the "object" from ORDBMS?