| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Pavel Golub <pavel(at)gf(dot)microolap(dot)com>, Pavel Golub <pavel(at)microolap(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: variant of regclass |
| Date: | 2013-12-05 16:56:45 |
| Message-ID: | 52A0B04D.5040501@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/5/13, 10:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>> We could invent some sneaky syntax variants, like 'pg_klass'::regclass
>> errors, but '?pg_klass'::regclass does not.
>
> Hmm ... cute idea, but shoehorning it into regoperator might be
> problematic. You'd have to pick a flag character that wasn't a
> valid operator character, which lets out '?' as well as a lot
> of the other mnemonically-reasonable choices.
Well, you could pick any letter, I suppose.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | J Smith | 2013-12-05 17:18:17 | Re: Errors on missing pg_subtrans/ files with 9.3 |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2013-12-05 16:52:22 | Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol |