Re: SQL feature requests

On 8/23/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Chuck McDevitt" <cmcdevitt(at)greenplum(dot)com> writes:
> > Tom, it isn't just a case of "convenience". When we are trying to
> > convert users from another database (say Oracle for example) to
> > PostgeSQL, one of the big stumbling blocks that slows down the work is
> > all the little query changes that people have to make
>
> Well, if you're trying to sell it on the grounds of Oracle
> compatibility, then it should actually *be* Oracle compatible.
> What exactly do they do about the default-alias problem?

To the best of my knowledge such subqueries are completely anonymous.
There is no way to explicitly refer to them unless you provide an
alias. Which is exactly the solution that was proposed twice in this
thread, and has the further benefit of being forwards compatible with
any reasonable future standard.

As verification I asked a certified Oracle DBA. His understanding is
that Oracle may choose to rewrite the query for you or not. If it
does not rewrite the query, then it has an internal identifier but
there is no way you can get to it.

Cheers,
Ben