Обсуждение: Question regarding threaded mode

First, I appreciate PostgreSQL's extensive support for SQL and its
feature set greatly, which is why I use it, because of its extensive and
powerful features not found on some other SQL implementations and I hope
that the capabilities of it will continue to be expanded and improved.

Does PostGRESQL support or will it support a threaded server mode? Will
such a mode be available on Unix-type systems?

Also, has PostgreSQL considered adding some CLOB and BLOB types?

Updating Views

Triggers on Views

Additional Trigger Syntax (ie Oracle):


CREATE [OR REPLACE] TRIGGER <trigger_name>

     {BEFORE|AFTER} {INSERT|DELETE|UPDATE} ON <table_name>

     [REFERENCING [NEW AS <new_row_name>] [OLD AS <old_row_name>]]

     [FOR EACH ROW [WHEN (<trigger_condition>)]]

     <trigger_body>

Thank you.

On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 08:12:50PM -0500, Milla Erdee wrote:
> First, I appreciate PostgreSQL's extensive support for SQL and its
> feature set greatly, which is why I use it, because of its extensive and
> powerful features not found on some other SQL implementations and I hope
> that the capabilities of it will continue to be expanded and improved.
>
> Does PostGRESQL support or will it support a threaded server mode? Will
> such a mode be available on Unix-type systems?

Currently no. There's no real need for it so there's not really a push
for it either.

> Also, has PostgreSQL considered adding some CLOB and BLOB types?

Has had these for ages.

> Updating Views

You can create RULEs to do this.

> Triggers on Views

What would they do?

> Additional Trigger Syntax (ie Oracle):

I'm not seeing anything there more than syntactic sugar that PostgreSQL
doesn't support, but no, it doesn't take that syntax.

Hope this helps,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout   <kleptog@svana.org>   http://svana.org/kleptog/
> Patent. n. Genius is 5% inspiration and 95% perspiration. A patent is a
> tool for doing 5% of the work and then sitting around waiting for someone
> else to do the other 95% so you can sue them.

>> Additional Trigger Syntax (ie Oracle):

>I'm not seeing anything there more than syntactic sugar that PostgreSQL
>doesn't support, but no, it doesn't take that syntax.

Milla's syntax doesn't show that Oracle allows column level triggers.
That's the only difference I've noted.  Column triggers are nice for
efficiency, e.g. the trigger doesn't fire when a column doesn't change.  If
the trigger body is complex, you can test whether the OLD.col != NEW.col
for added efficiency in Postgres.

Rick



                     
                      Martijn van Oosterhout
                     
                      <kleptog@svana.org>            To:       Milla Erdee <millueradfa@yahoo.com>
                     
                      Sent by:                       cc:       pgsql-general@postgresql.org
                     
                      pgsql-general-owner@pos        Subject:  Re: [GENERAL] Question regarding threaded mode
                     
                      tgresql.org
                     

                     

                     
                      02/14/2005 11:02 AM
                     
                      Please respond to
                     
                      Martijn van Oosterhout
                     

                     

                     




On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 08:12:50PM -0500, Milla Erdee wrote:
> First, I appreciate PostgreSQL's extensive support for SQL and its
> feature set greatly, which is why I use it, because of its extensive and
> powerful features not found on some other SQL implementations and I hope
> that the capabilities of it will continue to be expanded and improved.
>
> Does PostGRESQL support or will it support a threaded server mode? Will
> such a mode be available on Unix-type systems?

Currently no. There's no real need for it so there's not really a push
for it either.

> Also, has PostgreSQL considered adding some CLOB and BLOB types?

Has had these for ages.

> Updating Views

You can create RULEs to do this.

> Triggers on Views

What would they do?

> Additional Trigger Syntax (ie Oracle):

I'm not seeing anything there more than syntactic sugar that PostgreSQL
doesn't support, but no, it doesn't take that syntax.

Hope this helps,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout   <kleptog@svana.org>   http://svana.org/kleptog/
> Patent. n. Genius is 5% inspiration and 95% perspiration. A patent is a
> tool for doing 5% of the work and then sitting around waiting for someone
> else to do the other 95% so you can sue them.
(See attached file: attl4bbc.dat)

Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 08:12:50PM -0500, Milla Erdee wrote:
>


>
>>Also, has PostgreSQL considered adding some CLOB and BLOB types?
>
>
> Has had these for ages.
>
You have BYTEA and TEXT which fill this need. But you could add CLOB and
BLOB types as synonyms for BYTEA and TEXT just to ease converting code
written for other RDBMS.

>
>>Updating Views
>
> You can create RULEs to do this.
>
>
The updating view syntax in many cases might be preferred in certian
cases and other types of syntax in other cases, and it should be up to
the programmer to decide which is best for a certian application.. A
certian syntax might be best for a certian case but another might be
best for another case. By the way, Updating views is where you can
update a table with INSERT, DELETE, UPDATE etc through a view.

>
>>Triggers on Views
>
>
> What would they do?
>
They would add additional functionality in case this kind of flexibility
is determined to be needed. Another idea: triggers on SELECTs. Why not?
Triggers can be useful for many more things than their original use.

>
>>Additional Trigger Syntax (ie Oracle):
>
>
> I'm not seeing anything there more than syntactic sugar that PostgreSQL
> doesn't support, but no, it doesn't take that syntax.
>

Then why not go ahead and support it, since it would seem it wouldnt be
difficult. I dont think PostGRESQL supports INSTEAD OF triggers as well.


Generally I think that it is a good idea to follow the philosophy where
we realise that just because a feature has no apparent benefit or use
for us, that no one else will need it. A feature that may have no use
for one person might be essential to another person. I believe it is
important to not place arbitrary restrictions or restrictions based on
personal preferences on how software can be used, for the reason I just
stated.

On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 15:25:15 -0500,
  Milla Erdee <millueradfa@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The updating view syntax in many cases might be preferred in certian
> cases and other types of syntax in other cases, and it should be up to
> the programmer to decide which is best for a certian application.. A
> certian syntax might be best for a certian case but another might be
> best for another case. By the way, Updating views is where you can
> update a table with INSERT, DELETE, UPDATE etc through a view.

You can create rules on a view so that you can do INSERT, DELETE or
UPDATE using a view name as a table and have changes take place.