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

Re: SQL:2003 keyword additions

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, Troels Arvin <troels(at)arvin(dot)dk>
Subject: Re: SQL:2003 keyword additions
Date: 2004-11-24 10:02:03
Message-ID: 200411241102.03083.peter_e@gmx.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
Simon Riggs wrote:
> If you are saying "we should not support the SQL standard with regard
> to the new reserved words added in SQL:2003", I would understand, but
> not agree.

Conformance to the SQL standard is defined such that statements that are 
specified in the standard should work precisely as specified in the 
standard.  It does *not* mean that statements that are not defined in 
the standard should fail to work.  Therefore, adding more reserved key 
words than necessary does not achieve anything in terms of SQL 
conformance.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

In response to

Responses

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Thomas HallgrenDate: 2004-11-24 11:32:52
Subject: Re: SQL:2003 keyword additions
Previous:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2004-11-24 04:41:40
Subject: Re: rtree: improve performance, tuple killing

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