Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature
Date: 2010-06-01 09:23:05
Message-ID: 1275384185.15468.2.camel@fsopti579.F-Secure.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On mån, 2010-05-31 at 18:23 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> My feeling is that (a) there is no hurry to do anything about an
> unreleased draft of the standard, and (b) perhaps Peter could lobby
> the committee to change the standard before it does get published.

Given that Oracle and DB2 already support that syntax in released
products, and I'm not even a member of any relevant body, that seems
pretty much impossible.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message KaiGai Kohei 2010-06-01 10:04:54 Re: [RFC] A tackle to the leaky VIEWs for RLS
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2010-06-01 09:08:37 Re: [RFC] A tackle to the leaky VIEWs for RLS