| From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Outstanding patches |
| Date: | 2002-11-07 06:03:17 |
| Message-ID: | 87ptthhq6y.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> CREATE SEQUENCE syntax changes: did we decide whether SQL99's notion of
> a sequence is close enough to ours that migrating to their syntax would
> be a good idea, and not just a source of confusion? I seem to recall
> some doubts being voiced about this (by Peter?), and I'm not sure we
> resolved them.
Last I heard, we had concluded that SQL2003's notion of a sequence is
sufficiently close to ours that the differences are mostly syntax.
(Note that SQL99 does not define sequences.)
Cheers,
Neil
--
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-11-07 06:08:56 | Re: 7.3b5 contrib compile problem |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-11-07 05:29:46 | Re: 7.3b5 contrib compile problem |