On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 19:54 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: > Hello > > 2010/12/7 Joshua D. Drake <jd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 09:14 -0500, Michael C Rosenstein wrote: > >> I won't press the issue for Postgres any further, but I will attest that > >> synonyms work quite elegantly in Oracle, provide valuable functionality, > >> and do not generally sow confusion among skilled developers. It sounds > >> like the proposed "synonym" feature for Postgres perhaps had a different > >> intention than I assumed, however, especially due to the differences > >> between the Oracle and PG viz. how "users," "schemas" and "databases" work. > > > > Your perception has been mirrored on the Oracle free list. Really what > > PostgreSQL people need to come to grips with is whether or not we want > > to make it easier for others to port to Pg or not. (assuming > > reasonableness) > > > > it's question if this is task more for EnterpriseDB and less for PostgreSQL? Well no I don't think that is a valid question honestly. EDB Advanced server is a proprietary product that has zero standing with the community direction. That is not a negative remark on EDB or Advanced server just that it really isn't our concern. JD -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
