Re: is syntax columname(tablename) necessary still?

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: is syntax columname(tablename) necessary still?
Date: 2010-08-09 13:02:56
Message-ID: 20100809130256.GA11439@fetter.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 12:18:33PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hello
>
> I am working on Grouping Sets support. The first issue is "cube"
> keyword. Contrib module "cube" define a few functions "cube". So if we
> want to continue in support this function, then "cube" have to be a
> unreserved keyword.

The "cube" contrib module was only ever meant to be replaced by the
real feature, which you're working on, so +1 for dropping everything
in it that you are not replacing with the one which complies with the
SQL standard.

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2010-08-09 13:06:52 Re: more personal copyrights
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2010-08-09 12:30:22 Re: MERGE Specification