| From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Nikhil Sontakke <nikhil(dot)sontakke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <pjmodos(at)pjmodos(dot)net>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: GRANT ON ALL IN schema |
| Date: | 2009-08-15 13:49:57 |
| Message-ID: | 162867790908150649u22c7dfb8j75b15b38b1861852@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2009/8/15 Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>:
>
>
> Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>
>> why we need DO statement? Why not just $$ $$. Only string literal
>> cannot be statement too, so DO is unnecessary.
>>
>> it can look like:
>>
>> $$
>> FOR r IN SELECT ....
>> END LOOP;
>> $$;
>>
>> ???
>>
>>
>
> Well, it's arguably somewhat un-SQL-ish. Every command in SQL is introduced
> by a keyword verb.
sure - this is not SQL statement.
I thing so most SQL-ish is T-SQL style. You have integrated procedural
statements.
so the best is directly:
FOR ....
LOOP
END LOOP;
but it's far future :)
>
> I'm also not sure I want to be trying to execute any arbitrary string that
> accidentally gets placed there because someone forgot to put a keyword or
> accidentally deleted it.
>
> But I'm not too dogmatic on the subject. What do others think?
>
> cheers
>
> andrew
>
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-08-15 15:11:21 | Re: GRANT ON ALL IN schema |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2009-08-15 13:19:17 | Re: GRANT ON ALL IN schema |