Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser,

From: Roy Badami <roy(at)gnomon(dot)org(dot)uk>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Roy Badami <roy(at)gnomon(dot)org(dot)uk>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser,
Date: 2005-03-23 22:33:45
Message-ID: 16961.61129.765741.645614@giles.gnomon.org.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Tom> That would eliminate the backward-compatibility problem
Tom> pretty well (since the constraints aren't documented and
Tom> hence aren't being used now), while not posing a big problem
Tom> for ISO cases (since if there's no constraint there are no
Tom> ambiguous cases, I believe --- the ISO syntax would require
Tom> all fields to be present).

The 'constraint' (interval type descriptor or whatever it's really
called) is mandatory in standard SQL, I think, so there's no ambiguity
anyway, unless anyone is using this undocumented syntax at the
moment...

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Roy Badami 2005-03-23 22:37:06 Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser,
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-03-23 22:24:35 Re: BUG #1517: SQL interval syntax is accepted by the parser,