Tom Lane wrote:
> A larger point is that this is still a protocol revision; pretending
it
> ain't is just willful obscurantism. You can tell it's a protocol
revision
> because you will need to rewrite client-side libraries to take
advantage
> of it. If we try to look the other way and pretend it
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So I imagine, if this is done fully with changes in the protocol layer,
> then certain commands like "get table schema in XML" would have to exist
> in the protocol, which doesn't seem right. Also, the XML output isn't a
> sibling of the current text/
Tom Lane writes:
> This is also a good time to stop and ask whether the frontend/backend
> protocol needs to change to support this. Not having read the spec,
> I have no idea what the low-level transport needs are for XML output,
> but I suspect our present protocol is not it ...
The spec defin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> I think for processing-oriented output, the system described in the
> SQL/XML standard draft is the way to go. Considering the people who wrote
> it, it's probably pulled from, or bound to appear in, a major commercial
> database.
Do you have a l
* Merlin Moncure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-03-05 10:03]:
> This is just about a total conversion of the backend to an xml document
> server. The marriage of xml and sql is awkward and not easily
> retrofitted to existing databases.
>
> Its pretty much proven that hierarchal storage techniques (xm
* Merlin Moncure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-03-05 10:02]:
> > Acually, the difficult part has been getting the information back
> > into the database. Getting it out is a very simple query. I imagine
> > that every language/environment has an SQL->XML library somewhere,
> > but I wasn't able to fin
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I also think that psql is not the place to implement something like this.
>
> Agreed.
>
> > It's most likely best put in the backend, as a function like
> > xmlfoo('select * from t1;')
> That seems a little bizarre. Wouldn't we want to have
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Sean Chittenden
%% Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 7:51 PM
%% To: Bob Calco
%% Cc: Merlin Moncure; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
%% Subject: Re: [HACKERS] XML ouput for psql
%%
%%
%% > I like PostgreSQL just as it is, and truth be told, I'd like
%% to see some
%% > additional
Tom Lane wrote:
This is also a good time to stop and ask whether the frontend/backend
protocol needs to change to support this. Not having read the spec,
I have no idea what the low-level transport needs are for XML output,
but I suspect our present protocol is not it ...
It might be interesting t
> I like PostgreSQL just as it is, and truth be told, I'd like to see some
> additional features in PL/pgSQL that are completely unrelated to the whole
> XML issue. But I see some interesting possibilities for PostgreSQL to make
> inroads in enterprise development if it were the first open source d
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I also think that psql is not the place to implement something like this.
Agreed.
> It's most likely best put in the backend, as a function like
> xmlfoo('select * from t1;')
That seems a little bizarre. Wouldn't we want to have a switch that
j
]
%% Subject: Re: [HACKERS] XML ouput for psql
%%
%%
%% Bob Calco writes:
%%
%% > I would like to see PostgreSQL eventually support XQuery:
%%
%% The specification is here:
%%
%% ftp://sqlstandards.org/SC32/WG3/Progression_Documents/FCD/4FCD1-1
%% 4-XML-2002-03.txt
%%
%% Go for
%% From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
%% [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Merlin Moncure
%% Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 10:19 AM
%% To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
%% Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
%% Subject: Re: [HACKERS] XML ouput for psql
%%
%%
%% This is just about a total conversion of the backend to an xml document
Bob Calco writes:
> I would like to see PostgreSQL eventually support XQuery:
The specification is here:
ftp://sqlstandards.org/SC32/WG3/Progression_Documents/FCD/4FCD1-14-XML-2002-03.txt
Go for it.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> One thing I have noticed about the schemes that are being advanced is that
> they seem to be inherently unspecifiable, formally, because column names are
> being used as tags.
The SQL/XML draft addresses this by specifying that a mapping from SQL
things to XML things spit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I think all psql needs is a simple output, similar to the ones used by
> Oracle, Sybase, and MySQL; the calling application should then process
> it in some way as needed (obviously this is not for interactive use).
> Where can one find a "standard table model?"
I thin
I've done a lot with XML lately, so I'll throw in my $0.02 worth.
One thing I have noticed about the schemes that are being advanced is that
they seem to be inherently unspecifiable, formally, because column names are
being used as tags.
An alternative might look something like this:
;s been several years in development.
Merlin
> -Original Message-
> From: Bob Calco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 9:10 AM
> To: Merlin Moncure; Alan Gutierrez
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [HACKERS] XML ouput for psql
>
> I
Merlin Moncure
%% Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 8:16 AM
%% To: Alan Gutierrez
%% Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
%% Subject: Re: [HACKERS] XML ouput for psql
%%
%%
%% XSLT could be used to convert virtually any xml table format directly
%% into an insert statement. For me, this is better than using a
XSLT could be used to convert virtually any xml table format directly
into an insert statement. For me, this is better than using a
programming language plus a parser. XSLT is quite powerful and fast and
is build on top of xpath, and is a closer fit to the declarative
programming model of sql. V
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-03-04 14:21]:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> > The XML standard does not call for any table format. But a
> > number of table formats have been established within the XML
> > framework. Some of them are formatting-oriented (e.
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-03-04 14:21]:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> > The XML standard does not call for any table format. But a number of
> > table formats have been established within the XML framework. Some of
> > them are formatting-oriented
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> The XML standard does not call for any table format. But a number of
> table formats have been established within the XML framework. Some of
> them are formatting-oriented (e.g., the HTML model, or CALS which is used
> in DocBook) and some of the
23 matches
Mail list logo
