From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | francois(dot)perou(at)free(dot)fr |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: SQL compatibility reminder: MySQL vs PostgreSQL |
Date: | 2010-03-05 15:28:55 |
Message-ID: | b42b73151003050728s1ea2edf7w93fba3d6b1540d50@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
2010/3/5 François Pérou <francois(dot)perou(at)free(dot)fr>:
> => All non-aggregate fields must be present in the GROUP BY clause
> http://drupal.org/node/555530
My take is that this is never going to happen unless we are strictly
talking about cases where the non-aggregate fields can be
unambiguously determined. If we aren't, mysql is wrong to allow this,
and developers that depend on it are wrong, and that is pretty much
all you are ever going to get from this list. :-)
The other stuff is mainly tangential fluff issues (takes 1% extra
effort to write portable sql for) except for the flexible multi table
delete, which would be nice although I wouldn't expect a strict copy
of mysql syntax. I am personally looking at writeable CTE (which
didn't make 9.0) to do most of the things I would need to do with a
multi table delete feature, plus a quite a few other things.
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-03-05 16:39:34 | Re: SQL compatibility reminder: MySQL vs PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-03-05 15:14:56 | Re: SQL compatibility reminder: MySQL vs PostgreSQL |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-03-05 16:39:34 | Re: SQL compatibility reminder: MySQL vs PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Tim Bunce | 2010-03-05 15:26:51 | Core dump running PL/Perl installcheck with bleadperl [PATCH] |