Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Chris Bitmead <chrisb@nimrod.itg.telstra.com.au> writes:
> > 3) Returning of sub-class fields. Any ODBMS *must* do this by
> > definition. If it doesn't, it isn't an ODBMS.
>
> Chris, you have a bad habit of defining away the problem. Not
> everyone is convinced upon this point, and your assertions that
> there was consensus don't help your cause.
I am convinced ;).
There should be no consensus that "there should be no way to
retrieve sub-fields" ;)
I agree that the default may well be to retrieve only fuelds of
base class.
>
> Possibly more to the point: your patch doesn't implement the
> above behavior AFAICS. (Certainly libpq is unprepared to support
> multiple tuple types returned in one SELECT
IIRC Bruce removed that feature in Pg95 days claiming that it would
not be needed. If backend starts to support it again it would be
relatively easy to put back in.
> --- and there are no
> frontend changes in your patch.) So it might help if you'd clarify
> exactly what the proposed patch does and doesn't do.
>
> regards, tom lane
