Received: from antares.mcs.anl.gov (mcs.anl.gov [140.221.9.6]) by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA81953 for ; Sat, 2 Oct 1999 01:51:53 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from selkovjr@xnet.com) Received: from xnet.com (selkovjr@[204.248.57.204]) by antares.mcs.anl.gov (8.6.10/8.6.10) with ESMTP id AAA14203; Sat, 2 Oct 1999 00:51:42 -0500 Message-Id: <199910020551.AAA14203@antares.mcs.anl.gov> To: Oleg Bartunov , pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Re: [HACKERS] pgbash-1.1.1 release In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 01 Oct 1999 15:38:11 +0400." Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 00:51:14 -0400 From: "Gene Selkov Jr." > I have to connect to any database to issue > exec_sql -l database A database name is required to connect (by libpq? protocol?). This can be cured by using template1 as a default. However, the issue naturally develops into a more serious concern: are we going to have inter-database queries in any plausible future? Thanks, --Gene ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The idea of adding a database interface to sh, although I can immediately see its usefulness, srikes me funny. We are apparently looking to have an elisp interface soon (thanks to Eric Marsden); sooner or later, one will be finding the SQL code stashed everywhere throughout the system. Would it then be wrong to expect the whole backend embedded into the unix kernel? That would definitely swallow a share of IBM's server market ;-> Now think about this: after wrapping it up into the kernel, what will prevent you from building a Prolog on top of it? Next thing that comes to mind would be a neural network interface to the postgres-enabled prolog-backtracking unix kernel. The chances of winnning a Rube Godberg contest are already high and rising ... http://www.anl.gov/OPA/rube/rubeolive.html