From: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Count(*) throws error |
Date: | 2007-07-12 18:11:33 |
Message-ID: | 46966ED5.4080204@archonet.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Again, I'm trying to look at the big picture of both syntactic and
> semantic errors. If we solve only the syntactic end of it I think we'd
> actually be worse off, because then users would be even more lost when
> they hit a semantic error (unwanted substitution).
The only real solution is to have some clear syntactic sugar denoting
where variables are to be interpolated:
SELECT * FROM foo WHERE (bar + 1) = bar -- Which is the var?
SELECT * FROM foo WHERE (bar + 1) = $bar -- OK
SELECT * FROM foo WHERE (bar + 1) = {bar} -- OK
It's not clear to plpgsql because it's *not clear*.
In any other namespace-conflict situation I can think of it's always
inner-definition-is-visible. This would of course solve the problem, but
only by preventing you from substituting in variables that conflict
with columns. Unless you generate a warning at function compile-time
that doesn't seem much better.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Benjamin Arai | 2007-07-12 18:19:18 | Re: Big table with UNION ALL or partitioning with Tsearch2 |
Previous Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2007-07-12 18:07:49 | Re: Big table with UNION ALL or partitioning with Tsearch2 |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2007-07-12 18:13:23 | Re: compiler warnings on the buildfarm |
Previous Message | Michael Paesold | 2007-07-12 18:02:55 | Re: 2PC-induced lockup |