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

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh

From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
To: "'PostgreSQL Development'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh
Date: 2000-02-29 14:14:34
Message-ID: 219F68D65015D011A8E000006F8590C604AF7D04@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> > > If not, I'd vote for pulling it out.  That's a heck of a 
> poor word to
> > > reserve.
> > I am afraid of lots of user complaints, even if we had not 
> already used
> > TEMP.
> 
> OK, but we've already got "user complaints" about TEMP being a
> reserved word, so that part seems to balance out. There is apparently
> no basis in published standards for TEMP being a reserved word. And
> btw it is not currently documented as a reserved word in
> syntax.sgml...

TEMP is not a reserved word in informix, so there seems to be the
possibility to do a 
grammar trick.

The portability syntax that would be needed is only:

select * from table where ..... INTO TEMP _mytemp;

Your example had the into temp after the select list, which does 
not work in informix.

Andreas

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thomas LockhartDate: 2000-02-29 14:19:47
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] NO-CREATE-TABLE and NO-LOCK-TABLE
Previous:From: The Hermit HackerDate: 2000-02-29 13:17:08
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Re: ALTER TABLE DROP COLUMN

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