| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Hervé Piedvache <herve(at)elma(dot)fr>, Darko Prenosil <darko(dot)prenosil(at)finteh(dot)hr>, Postgresql General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Why lower's not accept an AS declaration ? |
| Date: | 2003-08-18 22:59:37 |
| Message-ID: | 4958.1061247577@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> writes:
> -- This seems really different from our previous standard reading of SQL92
> though. It implies that you can't really do stuff on input columns
> except in very limited cases and that'd be really bad.
Yes, it seems fraught with bogus restrictions, which makes me wonder if
we're interpreting it correctly.
I could understand a definition that says "unqualified names are first
sought as output column names, and if no match then treated as input
column names; qualified names are always input column names". Perhaps
that's what they're really trying to do, but why all the strange
verbiage?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dennis Gearon | 2003-08-18 23:24:46 | Re: Why lower's not accept an AS declaration ? |
| Previous Message | Stephan Szabo | 2003-08-18 22:21:07 | Re: Why lower's not accept an AS declaration ? |