From: | "Reggie Burnett" <rykr(at)bellsouth(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "'Peter Eisentraut'" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "'Bruce Momjian'" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "'Dave Cramer'" <dave(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, "'PostgreSQL Hackers Mailing List'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Request for qualified column names |
Date: | 2003-01-28 22:24:57 |
Message-ID: | 006001c2c71c$1a0ce6a0$c600a8c0@endeavor |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Could someone point me to this standard? Is that the standard for SQL
syntax? I wasn't aware there was a standard for RDBMS functionality. I
always assumed the features provided by the RDBMS were up to the
implementers.
Reggie
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 3:59 PM
> To: Bruce Momjian
> Cc: Tom Lane; Reggie Burnett; 'Dave Cramer'; 'PostgreSQL Hackers
Mailing
> List'
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Request for qualified column names
>
> Bruce Momjian writes:
>
> > My idea on this after chat with Dave was to add a GUC option that
puts
> > the schema.table.column name as the default column label, rather
than
> > just the column name.
>
> Can someone explain why this is needed at all? There is a reason why
the
> SQL standard does not provide for this information: it's not well
defined.
> Are you trying to make up a poor substitute for updatable views?
>
> --
> Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Steve Crawford | 2003-01-28 23:26:01 | Re: Cannot connect to the database (PG 7.3) |
Previous Message | Reggie Burnett | 2003-01-28 22:23:23 | Re: Request for qualified column names |