At 11:21 AM 2/6/00 +1100, Chris wrote:
>Tom Lane wrote:
>>(One thing that still needs to be looked at is
>> whether SQL 3 defines any comparable features, and
>> if so whether we ought to be following their syntax
>> and behavior.)
>I just downloaded the SQL3 document from dec. I can't seem to make head
>or tail of it. Can anybody understand what it's saying?
No ... a full summary of the private discussion earlier today between
Jan and I regarding referential integrity would indicate that NOBODY can
understand what it's saying! Be glad it was in private, it was bad
enough that the two of us had to see each other so confused.
Date cheated, his co-author's a ringer who was part of the standards
committee and knows what they meant, rather than what they wrote :)
The appendix on SQL3 in Date's book talks very briefly about it.
There's a CREATE TABLE foo LIKE bar that causes foo to inherit
from bar. He doesn't go into details, though. Talks briefly about
sub and super tables and how the consequences aren't fully
understood. Then he punts.
It would still be a good place to start if you have it.
- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza@pacifier.com> Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest Rare Bird Alert
Serviceand other goodies at http://donb.photo.net.