Re: select ... into question

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: select ... into question
Date: 2003-05-01 17:32:11
Message-ID: 17302.1051810331@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> our parser allows the into clause only between the target list and the
> from clause. While this is surely the was I usually use that clause,
> others dbms are different. Informix e.g. allows it also as the very last
> clause after the having clause.

> Is there a reason (standard?) why we don't allow that, or shall I go
> ahead and commit a parser change to allow this order?

SELECT INTO is so brain-damaged already that we should not enlarge the
scope of syntaxes it commandeers. (People ought to be using CREATE
TABLE AS for this, IMHO.)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-05-01 17:35:20 Re: Should we SetQuerySnapshot() between actions of a rule?
Previous Message Nigel J. Andrews 2003-05-01 17:04:49 Re: [HACKERS] "Adding missing from clause" (replacement)