| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | test_autoincrement <tony(at)marston-home(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #1948: Enhancement Request - INSERT syntax |
| Date: | 2005-10-08 19:52:18 |
| Message-ID: | 20051008195218.GR36108@pervasive.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 12:49:58PM +0100, test_autoincrement wrote:
> This is not user-friendly, and I think the SQL committee made a big mistake
> in defining totally different structures for the INSERT and UPDATE
> statements.
Matter of opinion.
> MySQL already offers this option, so why can't you?
MySQL also thinks it's OK to truncate data. Comparing PostgreSQL to them
isn't a very good way to go about getting a feature added.
Ultimately, I highly doubt that anyone on -hackers has any interest in
this, so it's very unlikely to get done unless you do it yourself (or
pay someone to do it). Even then I suspect -hackers might reject it.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-08 20:33:10 | Re: BUG #1947: Enhancement Request - CONCAT() function |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-08 17:58:12 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #1927: incorrect timestamp returned |