From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Hallgren <thhal(at)mailblocks(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Bug or stupidity |
Date: | 2004-10-25 14:53:55 |
Message-ID: | 20041025074141.E47966@megazone.bigpanda.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> Stephan Szabo wrote:
>
> > It's enabled in large part for backwards compatibility. There's a
> runtime
> > option that controls the behavior (add_missing_from).
> >
> IMHO, it would be a more natural choice to have the add_missing_from
> disabled by default. Why would anyone *ever* want faulty SQL being
In general, when we add a backwards compatibility option, we give a couple
of versions before the default is changed. In addition, until we have a
form of delete which allows a "from" list, there are some queries which
are really more naturally written in a form similar to add_missing_from
(although "from" lists would be better).
> magically "patched up" by the dbms?
I think that many people do, even if they don't realize it. Pretty much
almost any extension to the spec is faulty SQL, from != and use of column
aliases in some places they technically aren't allowed to DISTINCT ON and
UPDATE FROM.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2004-10-25 15:31:49 | Re: Sorting, when values are equal.... |
Previous Message | Ryan Richards | 2004-10-25 14:19:31 |