| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Nikhil Sontakke <nikhil(dot)sontakke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <pjmodos(at)pjmodos(dot)net>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: GRANT ON ALL IN schema |
| Date: | 2009-08-15 13:19:17 |
| Message-ID: | 4A86B5D5.6060807@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Pavel Stehule wrote:
> why we need DO statement? Why not just $$ $$. Only string literal
> cannot be statement too, so DO is unnecessary.
>
> it can look like:
>
> $$
> FOR r IN SELECT ....
> END LOOP;
> $$;
>
> ???
>
>
Well, it's arguably somewhat un-SQL-ish. Every command in SQL is
introduced by a keyword verb.
I'm also not sure I want to be trying to execute any arbitrary string
that accidentally gets placed there because someone forgot to put a
keyword or accidentally deleted it.
But I'm not too dogmatic on the subject. What do others think?
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2009-08-15 13:49:57 | Re: GRANT ON ALL IN schema |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2009-08-15 11:34:40 | Re: GRANT ON ALL IN schema |