Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> I guess what I might have alluded to with "design document" is that you
> would have explained that connection, because I did look at the old
> thread(s) and didn't have any clue what was decided upon.
AFAIR, nothing was decided on ;-) ... the list has gone 'round on this
topic a few times without achieving anything you could call consensus.
I think Robert Easter might have his hands on the right idea: there
is more than one concept here, and more than one set of applications
to be addressed. We need to break things down into component concepts
rather than trying for a one-size-fits-all solution.
> I'll tell you what, I have some time next week, and I'll read up on SQL3.
> Perhaps I'll survive it. ;-)
Daniel enters the lions' den ... good luck ;-)
regards, tom lane
