From: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(dot)geoghegan86(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: "writable CTEs" |
Date: | 2010-12-29 19:26:48 |
Message-ID: | 20101229192648.GT25421@fetter.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 11:07:59PM +0000, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On 28 December 2010 20:07, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> > The phrase "common table expression" does not appear anywhere in the SQL
> > standard. The standard uses the grammar symbol <with clause>.
>
> I think we're losing sight of the issue a bit here.
>
> No one is proposing that we call WITH queries common table
> expressions. As I think we all agree, the term "WITH query" and
> "common table expression" are not synonymous. A WITH query is
> comprised of one or more common table expressions, plus a conventional
> SELECT query.
As of 9.1, the thing appended to the CTE(s) can be a conventional DML
query (SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE). I'm hoping to expand this
in future versions. :)
> All that I'm asking is that we /specify/ that the "subqueries"
> already mentioned in the docs are common table expressions.
+1
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-12-29 19:29:45 | Re: and it's not a bunny rabbit, either |
Previous Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2010-12-29 19:19:05 | Re: pg_streamrecv for 9.1? |