Re: DROP [TEMP] TABLE syntax, as reason why not?

2017-08-24 3:08 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> "David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I'm wondering if there is anything technical preventing someone from making:
>
>> DROP TEMP TABLE tablename;
>
> There is no great need for that because you can get the semantics you're
> asking for with "DROP TABLE pg_temp.tablename".
>
> regards, tom lane

This sounds like another syntax inconsistency/asymmetry.

ALTER TABLE pg_temp.tablename ... is OK.
ALTER TEMP TABLE tablename ... is NOT OK.

CREATE TEMP TABLE tablename ... is OK.
CREATE TABLE pg_temp.tablename ... is OK.

DROP TABLE pg_temp.tablename ... is OK.
DROP TEMP TABLE tablename ... is NOT OK.

Unless the standard explicitly forbids it, why not supporting both
syntaxes in all commands using the TABLE predicate?
Those are semantically equivalent. Aren't they?

--
Vincenzo Romano - NotOrAnd.IT
Information Technologies
--
NON QVIETIS MARIBVS NAVTA PERITVS