Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh

> > > If not, I'd vote for pulling it out. That's a heck of a poor word to
> > > reserve.
> > I am afraid of lots of user complaints, even if we had not already used
> > TEMP.
>
> OK, but we've already got "user complaints" about TEMP being a
> reserved word, so that part seems to balance out. There is apparently
> no basis in published standards for TEMP being a reserved word. And
> btw it is not currently documented as a reserved word in
> syntax.sgml...

OK, I certainly didn't look at the standard to when I implemented TEMP
tables. In fact, I was surprised it worked considering it is just a
hack on the cache code.

Let's forget I made a mistake, and consider how many people are going to
think they should use TEMP and how many TEMPORARY. I personally would
guess TEMP and never TEMPORARY. I wonder if others would too.

So are we willing to field questions from people trying to use TEMP
tables and trying TEMP and not TEMPORARY. I realize the restriction on
a field called TEMP, but we don't get those very often. How many people
are going to guess TEMP and not TEMPORARY?

Of course, as a Unix guy, I may have guessed TMP too. :-)

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026