| From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: make == as = ? |
| Date: | 2004-04-10 09:13:18 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.58.0404101104270.2356@honfleur |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > Could we consider a three (or more) way setting, for what to do?
> > Something like:
> >
> > sql_noncompliance_mode = error;
> > sql_noncompliance_mode = warn / notice;
> > sql_noncompliance_mode = ignore;
>
> I think a boolean that turns on warnings would be enough.
Hmmm.
I could think of:
sql_version = sql2/sql92/sql3/sql99/postgresql/oracle/mysql/extended
Or maybe with a simple integer...
sql_strict_compliance = on/off
On strict, errors could be generated for incompatible features in user
sql queries. Otherwise, only warnings or notice appear for misfeatures.
It would be possible to mimic (theoretically) other SQL implementations.
With "extended", I could have c-like operators;-) : ! && || == !=
Still dreaming.
--
Fabien Coelho - coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2004-04-10 09:35:42 | Re: make == as = ? |
| Previous Message | rm_pg | 2004-04-10 06:16:40 | Re: PostgreSQL configuration |