Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: SQL keywords

From: "Ross J(dot) Reedstrom" <reedstrm(at)rice(dot)edu>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SQL keywords
Date: 2000-12-15 23:38:01
Message-ID: 20001215173801.A32536@rice.edu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs
On Sat, Dec 16, 2000 at 12:29:16AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> 
> But does anyone know what they do want to know?
> 
> The list of PostgreSQL reserved words seems to be the only thing I can see
> as definitely essential.  But which is more important:  The list of words
> that are reserved in PG but *not* reserved in SQLxx (i.e., what problems
> can I expect when porting stuff to PG), or the opposite (i.e., what words
> should I avoid when writing portable SQL).

If anyone ever gets around to writing an SQL Flagger (as required for
FIPS 127-2 compliance: the US Federal gov't standard that incorporates
SQL92) they'll need the second list: things in PG not in the standard(s)

Ross
-- 
Open source code is like a natural resource, it's the result of providing
food and sunshine to programmers, and then staying out of their way.
[...] [It] is not going away because it has utility for both the developers 
and users independent of economic motivations.  Jim Flynn, Sunnyvale, Calif.

In response to

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Hannu KrosingDate: 2000-12-16 08:08:48
Subject: Re: SQL keywords
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2000-12-15 23:29:16
Subject: SQL keywords

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group