Re: [HACKERS] Re: Inheritance docs error.

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Robert B(dot) Easter" <reaster(at)comptechnews(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Paul Govereau <pgoverea(at)akamai(dot)com>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: Inheritance docs error.
Date: 2001-01-03 09:30:51
Message-ID: 3A52F14B.10FE6D8C@tm.ee
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
>
> One thing that bothered me is that my reading of the SQL99 draft
> disallows the UNDER syntax you are using. I read:
>
> <table definition> ::=
> CREATE [ <table scope> ] TABLE <table name>
> <table contents source>
> [ ON COMMIT <table commit action> ROWS ]
>
> <table contents source> ::=
> <table element list>
> | OF <user-defined type>
> [ <subtable clause> ]
> [ <table element list> ]
>
> <subtable clause> ::=
> UNDER <supertable clause>
>
> <supertable clause> ::= <supertable name>
>
> It looks to me like "UNDER <table name>" cannot appear without a
> preceding "OF <user-defined type>". I am not clear on the semantic
> implications of the OF clause.

to me it seems that only this is OR-d : <table element list> | OF
<user-defined type>

and the rest ([ <subtable clause> ],[ <table element list> ])is just
optional

> Anyway, we seem to have a clear consensus to pull the UNDER clause from
> the grammar and stick with INHERITS for 7.1. I will take care of that
> in the next day or so.

Good.

-----------
Hannu

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message drevil 2001-01-03 09:59:33 Re: MySQL and PostgreSQL speed compare
Previous Message anson 2001-01-03 08:04:36 Sequence

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Frank Joerdens 2001-01-03 13:44:32 Re: [INTERFACES] Re: PHP and PostgreSQL
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2001-01-03 07:14:15 Please review TODO list