From: | "Rod Taylor" <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca> |
---|---|
To: | "Vince Vielhaber" <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: insert statements |
Date: | 2002-03-14 14:01:20 |
Message-ID: | 003e01c1cb60$b975d250$8001a8c0@jester |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Why not send in your changes to PostNuke along with the appropriate
section from the SQL specs?
Surely they'll apply a reasoned patch which improves conformance to
the SQL standard and doesn't break anything in the process. I'd
suspect both SyBase, and MySQL can also take insert into foo (a) as
well.
--
Rod Taylor
This message represents the official view of the voices in my head
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vince Vielhaber" <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>
To: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 8:29 AM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] insert statements
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> > Vince Vielhaber writes:
> >
> > > For example:
> > >
> > > insert into foo(foo.a) values(1);
> > >
> > > fails because the table name is used. Update statements also
include the
> > > table name. Both fail. Does anyone know of a workaround?
> >
> > Completely loudly to whomever wrote that SQL. It's completely
> > non-standard.
> >
> > (The implication I'm trying to make is that there's no way to make
> > PostgreSQL accept that statement. Adding this as an extension has
been
> > rejected in the past.)
>
> I'm now wondering why it was rejected. I couldn't try this last
nite
> so I just tried it now. Here's with Sybase 11.0.3.3 :
>
> 1> create table foo(a int)
> 2> go
> 1> insert into foo(a) values(1)
> 2> go
> (1 row affected)
> 1> insert into foo(foo.a) values(2)
> 2> go
> (1 row affected)
> 1>
>
> And I suspect more than just mysql and sybase accept either syntax.
> Right now I'm modifying postnuke but that's only a short term
solution,
> and I wouldn't want to add it to PostgreSQL either 'cuze if it
remains
> rejected that would hamper upgrades. ROCK --> ME <-- HARD PLACE
:)
> There are really no other decent CMSs available that support
PostgreSQL.
>
> Vince.
> --
>
======================================================================
====
> Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com
http://www.pop4.net
> 56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
> Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
> Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
>
======================================================================
====
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of
broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Vince Vielhaber | 2002-03-14 14:08:21 | Re: insert statements |
Previous Message | Jean-Paul ARGUDO | 2002-03-14 13:57:10 | Re: 'Following' the Primary key |