| From: | "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Meskes <meskes(at)topsystem(dot)de> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Keyword |
| Date: | 1998-03-13 15:04:21 |
| Message-ID: | 35094AF5.993BDD80@alumni.caltech.edu |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I'm currently trying to get ecpg more in line with the backends
> parser. Doing so I found ecpg accepts a syntax the backend doesn't.
> It's 'commit work release' which is accepted for compatibility with
> Oracle. How about allowing this in the backend, too?
I don't want to sound too fussy here, but does this statement provide
any functionality missing from the SQL92 syntax 'commit [work]'? If not,
then perhaps Oracle users could start writing portable code if they
cared to?
- Tom
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas G. Lockhart | 1998-03-13 15:37:22 | Re: [QUESTIONS] using composite types |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-03-13 14:49:01 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [QUESTIONS] Does Storage Manager support >2GB tables? |