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

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

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, George Dau <gedau(at)isa(dot)mim(dot)com(dot)au>, "'pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returnsmultiples
Date: 2000-02-29 14:35:08
Message-ID: 38BBD91C.E11F7547@alumni.caltech.edu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-sql
> > A major release is a good time to adjust syntax to promote
> > compliance...
> I've been (lightly) bashed in the past for proposing such things (see
> END/ABORT) but I'm with you. I think that TEMP may be far too wide-spread
> by now, though.

Well, imho the TEMP issue is not identical to END/ABORT. For TEMP, we
are unnecessarily restricting the space of possible identifiers,
eliminating a common and obvious name. The fix is trivial, and the
affected parties are *only* those who use temporary tables and who
chose to *not* use SQL92 syntax, which was always available.

                    - Thomas

-- 
Thomas Lockhart				lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu
South Pasadena, California

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Don BaccusDate: 2000-02-29 14:35:25
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh
Previous:From: Don BaccusDate: 2000-02-29 14:30:59
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: NOT {NULL|DEFERRABLE} (was: bug in 7.0)

pgsql-sql by date

Next:From: Don BaccusDate: 2000-02-29 14:35:25
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh
Previous:From: Forgacs TamasDate: 2000-02-29 13:29:54
Subject: DATE formatting problem again

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