| From: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "'pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-sql(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh |
| Date: | 2000-02-29 06:48:06 |
| Message-ID: | 38BB6BA6.B5FACCAD@alumni.caltech.edu |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
> > If not, I'd vote for pulling it out. That's a heck of a poor word to
> > reserve.
> I am afraid of lots of user complaints, even if we had not already used
> TEMP.
OK, but we've already got "user complaints" about TEMP being a
reserved word, so that part seems to balance out. There is apparently
no basis in published standards for TEMP being a reserved word. And
btw it is not currently documented as a reserved word in
syntax.sgml...
- Thomas
--
Thomas Lockhart lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu
South Pasadena, California
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2000-02-29 07:06:29 | RE: [HACKERS] Re: ALTER TABLE DROP COLUMN |
| Previous Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2000-02-29 06:43:03 | Re: [HACKERS] interesting observatation regarding views and V7.0 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2000-02-29 10:54:06 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiples |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-02-29 05:59:12 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh |