Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> I concur, but do we have some sort of commitment that the rest of
> the SQL200x sequence machinery will be supported eventually? Otherwise,
> adding some irrelevant syntax variations in limited places doesn't seem
> fruitful.
Yes, I'll implement the rest of the SQL200x sequence stuff
eventually. However, if you'd rather wait for me to finish it all and
then commit it at that point, that's fine with me.
Cheers,
Neil
--
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC