Re: New warning code for missing FROM relations

From: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: New warning code for missing FROM relations
Date: 2000-06-04 03:23:59
Message-ID: 3.0.5.32.20000604132359.00990320@mail.rhyme.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
>> Is is worth adding yet another setting, eg. set sql92=strict, which would
>> disallow such flagrant breaches of the standard? Maybe it could even be set
>> as the default in template1? I understand that breaking legacy code is a
>> bad idea, so the warning is a good step, but I would prefer an error if I
>> ever write such a statement.
>
>I am concerned about overloading the SET command. Seems we should just
>agree on a behavior.
>

Then make it an option at build time.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner | __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \
(A.C.N. 008 659 498) | /(@) ______---_
Tel: +61-03-5367 7422 | _________ \
Fax: +61-03-5367 7430 | ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \|
| --________--
PGP key available upon request, | /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lamar Owen 2000-06-04 04:49:01 7.0.1 Problems.
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2000-06-04 02:58:58 Re: New warning code for missing FROM relations