From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature |
Date: | 2010-05-28 16:19:38 |
Message-ID: | 4BFFED1A.40400@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> What's poor about it? It probably comes from PLSQL which in turn got it
> from Ada, so they aren't just making this up. I agree it's inconvenient
> for us, but that's a different issue.
Further, the
( parameter := value ) notation is not only consistent with what is used
inside pl/pgsql, it's also more consistent than "AS" with SQL Server's
named parameter notation, which is:
EXEC dbo.GetItemPrice @ItemCode = 'GXKP', @PriceLevel = 5
Since former SQL Server / Sybase apps are the most likely to use named
parameter notation in PostgreSQL, having a syntax which could be ported
using only "sed" would be nice.
Relevant to the whole discussion, though ... is the conflicting SQL
standard syntax something we're every likely to implement?
--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-05-28 16:27:52 | How to pass around collation information |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-05-28 15:02:52 | Re: [9.1] pg_stat_get_backend_server_addr |