On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 09:52:44AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Darren,
>
> > I was interested as to if there were plans to develop SQL99 nested
> > tables. I know with AJAX(tm) starting to grow in popularity that
> > the XML features of SQL2003 would prove useful for EnterpriseDB.
>
> I realize that nested tables are in SQL99, but so is SQLJ and a few
> other really dumb ideas. As Joe Celko (member of the SQL92
> committee) put it, "we were a committee, and a committee never met a
> feature it didn't like."
>
> Can you make a use-case for nested tables?
Now that the time travel option is gone, this is a way of implementing
it.
> It would need to be a fairly strong one, given that they basically
> violate the relational model. If what you're really interested in
> is XML data support, then I'd suggest focusing on that instead.
XML data support would be best if coordinated. There are several
different projects right now, and one more would be bad.
> Of course, that's just my opinion.
I think it would be kinda nice if a column type could be anything,
including SETOF some_composite_type. If I recall correctly, Illustra
had this, and it was a pretty cool feature :) It might also help
implement the SQL:2003 standard for UNNEST, MULTISET, FUSION, COLLECT
and INTERSECT.
In re: the relational model, that's already broken, although Date's
excellent new book from O'Reilly encourages people to implement
Tutorial D. :)
Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter david@fetter.org http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100 mobile: +1 415 235 3778
Remember to vote!
