| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SESSION SESSION - bug or intentional? |
| Date: | 2015-09-30 21:49:59 |
| Message-ID: | 30149.1443649799@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> wrote:
>> I was looking at something in gram.y when I noticed that the following
>> production works:
>> SET SESSION SESSION CHARACTERISTICS AS TRANSACTION READ ONLY;
>> "SESSION SESSION" seems fairly odd -- is it intentional?
> However, SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION is defined as thus:
> SET [ SESSION | LOCAL ] SESSION AUTHORIZATION user_name
Yeah. SET LOCAL SESSION AUTHORIZATION is valid and useful. The optional
SESSION is just a noise word here, but disallowing it would be
non-orthogonal compared to other similar syntaxes.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Browne | 2015-09-30 22:02:45 | Re: No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So! |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2015-09-30 21:31:25 | Re: No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So! |