From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Recursive query syntax ambiguity |
Date: | 2007-01-26 17:10:01 |
Message-ID: | 87r6thaf4m.fsf@stark.xeocode.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hm, I had hoped that the DB2/ANSI syntax would only require making "WITH" a
fully reserved word, and not the other tokens it uses. Certainly for
non-recursive queries that's the case as the only other token it uses is "AS"
which is already a fully reserved word.
However to fully support the DB2/ANSI syntax we would definitely have an
ambiguity and I think we would have to make "CYCLE" a fully reserved word
which seems like a much bigger concession than "WITH". Observe the following
case:
WITH RECURSIVE foo (x,y) AS (select 1,2) SEARCH DEPTH FIRST BY x CYCLE x,y SET ...
The parser can't search arbitrarily far checking for a SET to see if the CYCLE
is a keyword or a binary operator. Even if it could things like this would be
entirely ambiguous:
WITH RECURSIVE foo (x,y) AS (select 1,2) SEARCH DEPTH FIRST BY x CYCLE x, y CYCLE y SET ...
I'm nowhere near actually implementing this functionality yet so there's no
pressing need for action. In fact I think the search clause is actually an
ANSIism that isn't supported by DB2 itself yet either.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-01-26 17:22:34 | Re: Proposal: Snapshot cloning |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-01-26 17:07:37 | Re: HAVING push-down |