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

Re: feature suggestion

From: "Rafael Azevedo" <rafael(at)webpro(dot)com(dot)br>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: feature suggestion
Date: 2007-08-01 00:17:26
Message-ID: 5e126fe30707311717t1a9eaa40w56833a7673ff6835@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Imagine that you have about 30 fields.
Ok, then your first SQL is done.
Now, you just have to add 10 more fields.
Its very easy to get lost. If we have this implementation, you could just
add

Field31 = 'text',
Field32 = 'text'
...
wherever you want.

This is just a PLUS. I just don't see any problem by doing this.
Even knowing that this is not Standard SQL-Syntax, I just see this as a
benefit feature.

Another reason is that we have more people migrating from MySQL to Postgre
than any other database server. People don't migrate to Postgre from Oracle.
Hardly from MS SQL Server.

It just makes easier to migrate users from other db servers.
And this is sure not hard to implement.

Today its easier to migrate to PostgreSQL from MySQL than from PostgreSQL to
MySQL.

In few words I have given you more reason to add this feature than not to
add it.

Think about it.



2007/7/31, Rafael Azevedo <rafael(at)webpro(dot)com(dot)br>:
>
> Yes it is. And it makes easier to migrate from MySQL servers to
> PostgreSQL.
> Today its easier to migrate to MySQL from PostgreSQL than from PostgreSQL
> to MySQL.
>
>
> 2007/7/31, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>:
> >
> > Gregory Stark wrote:
> > > "Rafael Azevedo" <rafael(at)webpro(dot)com(dot)br > writes:
> > >
> > > > Unstead of having to type all the insert syntax, using ("column")
> > names, you
> > > > could do the same as MySQL does.
> > > > for example:
> > > >
> > > > INSERT INTO Table SET
> > > > "Field1" = 'text',
> > > > "Field2" = 'text';
> > > >
> > > > So it would make it easier and faster to develop applications using
> > Postgre.
> > >
> > > I'm a bit mystified here. What exactly about this syntax is easier or
> > faster?
> > > You still have to list all the column names. It looks like it would
> > require
> > > just as much typing as the regular syntax, no?
> > >
> > > Or is it that you get to reuse the same string you use for doing an
> > update?
> >
> > As far as I can see, the _feature_ is matching MySQL optional
> > non-standard syntax.
> >
> > --
> > Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>           http://momjian.us
> > EnterpriseDB                               http://www.enterprisedb.com
> >
> > + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
> >
>

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2007-08-01 02:25:02
Subject: Re: feature suggestion
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2007-07-31 23:24:24
Subject: Re: Machine available for community use

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