| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: TABLE command |
| Date: | 2008-11-21 16:00:39 |
| Message-ID: | 1461.1227283239@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> relation_expr is fine by me. It just makes the syntax more complicated
> to explain ...
> Btw., so we plan to keep the sql_inheritance parameter forever?
I have no idea ... but I should think we'd want to allow ONLY here in
any case. You can use that anywhere else in the SELECT syntax that you
can write a table name, so why not here?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2008-11-21 16:17:32 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Silence compiler warning about ignored return value. |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2008-11-21 11:47:55 | pgsql: Use relation_expr for TABLE command, requested by Tom. |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-11-21 16:12:55 | Re: fmgr.h vs funcapi.h? |
| Previous Message | Emmanuel Cecchet | 2008-11-21 15:46:53 | Re: Transactions and temp tables |