| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan |
| Date: | 2017-09-08 21:16:05 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwb4ED4ejy+aGVxQdik7L3=oFBt6pSUn_SQb6GU=c9W0DQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > personally I prefer syntax without FOR keyword - because following
> keyword
> > must be reserved keyword
>
> > SET x = .., y = .. SELECT ... ;
>
> Nope. Most of the statement-starting keywords are *not* fully reserved;
> they don't need to be as long as they lead off the statement. But this
> proposal would break that. We need to put FOR or IN or another
> already-fully-reserved keyword after the SET list, or something's going
> to bite us.
>
Just throwing it out there but can we making putting SET inside a CTE work?
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-09-08 21:35:00 | Re: Adding support for Default partition in partitioning |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-09-08 21:14:15 | Re: PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan |