From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, premanand <kottiprem(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: MySQL search query is not executing in Postgres DB |
Date: | 2012-02-17 17:14:08 |
Message-ID: | 28679.1329498848@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I remember there was a time when you couldn't say "SELECT a x FROM
> foo" in PostgreSQL. We told people that it was because our syntax was
> more flexible - we have postfix operators, or something.
Which it was, and yes that was the reason. We eventually thought of a
kluge solution that lets you omit "AS" 90% of the time, which is better
than nothing; but I doubt it would ever have been accepted if it weren't
a matter of improving standards compliance. I am pretty sure that the
SQL spec doesn't say that you should be able to apply LIKE directly to
an integer, so that issue isn't comparable to this one.
> I don't know whether a similar improvement is
> possible in this area, but we're certainly not going to get there by
> labeling the user's expectations as unreasonable. I don't think they
> are, and the people who wrote MySQL and Oracle evidently agree.
The people who wrote MySQL had very poor taste in a lot of areas, and
we are not going to blindly follow their lead. Oracle is not a terribly
presentable system either. Having said that, I don't object to any
clean improvements we can think of in this area --- but "make it work
more like MySQL" had better not be the only argument for it.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2012-02-17 17:16:00 | Re: Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-02-17 17:09:25 | Re: Notes about fixing regexes and UTF-8 (yet again) |