X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Received: from salem.vale-housing.co.uk (mailgate.vale-housing.co.uk [193.195.77.162]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53EAD475D0F; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 03:32:59 -0500 (EST) thread-index: AcLnqNL7tKrFjPXYT/22KZikO02z0Q== Received: from vale-housing.co.uk ([192.168.1.89] RDNS failed) by salem.vale-housing.co.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Tue, 11 Mar 2003 08:32:59 +0000 Received: from tartanic.demon.co.uk ([80.177.99.193]) (SquirrelMail authenticated user dpage) by ssl.vale-housing.co.uk with HTTP; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:34:33 -0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <50149.80.177.99.193.1047375273.squirrel@ssl.vale-housing.co.uk> Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:34:33 -0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign From: "Dave Page" To: In-Reply-To: <200303110244.h2B2i1j15763@candle.pha.pa.us> References: <1942.1047350265@sss.pgh.pa.us> <200303110244.h2B2i1j15763@candle.pha.pa.us> X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Cc: , , , X-Mailer: SquirrelMail (version 1.2.6) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Mar 2003 08:32:59.0968 (UTC) FILETIME=[D2F66400:01C2E7A8] X-Archive-Number: 200303/415 X-Sequence-Number: 36661 It's rumoured that Bruce Momjian once said: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Bruce Momjian writes: >> > I was willing to add a hack to enable default column labels to be >> > "table.column" --- that seemed like the least obtrusive. >> >> Most of the definitional issues still apply: which table name are you >> going to insert, and under what conditions? >> >> If we're revising the protocol, there's no reason to hack up the >> column label to carry two pieces of info; it'd be cleaner to provide a >> separate slot in the T message to carry the table name. I just want >> to see a reasonably complete spec for what the feature is supposed to >> do, before we buy into it ... > > I don't think we can get a complete spec, and hence the _hack_ idea. > :-) Well, what would constitute a complete spec? I think I've told the group what I would like to be able to do, what unanswered questions can I (hopefully :-) ) answer? Regards, Dave.