[Nitro] Og, adapting postgresql to reorgnaization

[Jos Backus]

On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 05:02:31PM -0800, Judson Lester wrote:
> Oh, we're on the same page.  I just wish that an auto-incrementing
> type was part of the SQL spec, so that we didn't have such vast
> variations between how databases handle a pretty basic operation.
 
Agreed. But since the spec already has sequences, adding auto-incrementing
types would be duplication of functionality. Besides, sequences are more
powerful (but perhaps slighly less easy to use).

<rant>If MySQL cared about standards they would simply implement them and make
everybody's life a little easier. But given how popular MySQL is I doubt
they'll feel a strong need; people will use their (mediocre) product anyway
since it's the M in LAMP and ships with many distros. (Hm, I wonder how IE got
so popular...)</rant>

> That said, I continue to examine how Postgres could usefully use it's
> sequence lookup safely.

Thanks Judson!

Jos

> Judson
> 
> On 3/5/07, Jos Backus <jos at catnook.com> wrote:
> >On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 04:33:28PM -0800, Judson Lester wrote:
> >> Why autoincrements weren't part of the original spec, I'll never know.
> >
> >But PostgreSQL has support for sequences, which are in SQL2003, unlike 
> >MySQL's
> >proprietary autoincrement "feature". See
> >http://www.varlena.com/GeneralBits/71.php and
> >http://dev.mysql.com/tech-resources/faq.html#gen5
> >
> >(Yes, I vastly prefer PostgreSQL over MySQL.)
> >
> >--
> >Jos Backus
> >jos at catnook.com
> >_______________________________________________
> >Nitro-general mailing list
> >Nitro-general at rubyforge.org
> >http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/nitro-general
> >

-- 
Jos Backus
jos at catnook.com