Re: Should we drop the "object" from ORDBMS?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jeff Davis
Тема Re: Should we drop the "object" from ORDBMS?
Дата
Msg-id 1335640568.28653.89.camel@jdavis
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Should we drop the "object" from ORDBMS?  (Josh Berkus)
Ответы Re: Should we drop the "object" from ORDBMS?  (Josh Berkus)
Список pgsql-advocacy
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




В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Pavel Stehule
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Should we drop the "object" from ORDBMS?
Следующее
От: Josh Berkus
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Should we drop the "object" from ORDBMS?