| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Morten W(dot) Petersen" <morten(at)src(dot)no> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Is level a reserved keyword? (FYI) |
| Date: | 2000-07-09 21:34:46 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.21.0007092306150.10288-100000@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Morten W. Petersen writes:
> > > the word "level". Any ideas? Seems like a bug?
> >
> > This is PostgreSQL 6.5 btw.
> >
>
> I found the error. The original (accepting level db) was version 6.5.3,
> while the non-accepting was 6.5.0
"level", as in `set transaction isolation level serializable', is in
general "subject to being a keyword". It might not be in some versions,
but parsers are so subtle that could be again in the future.
--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Charles Tassell | 2000-07-09 22:30:56 | Re: Recreating unique indices without having dups & downtime. |
| Previous Message | Louis Bertrand | 2000-07-09 20:29:52 | PostgreSQL vs. MySQL |