From: | "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us |
Cc: | mail(at)joeconway(dot)com, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Values list-of-targetlists patch for comments (was Re: [PATCHES] |
Date: | 2006-08-04 04:43:08 |
Message-ID: | BAY20-F143AB0B68CABA5DB334B10F9500@phx.gbl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
>
>Good point. One question: are we happy calling this a 'VALUES list'? It's
>better than a 'table value constructor'. I took the lead from a comment in
>the
>source.
>
table value constructor is name from ANSI. All people wiil find t.v.c., not
values list. I vote table value constructor.
Regards
Pavel Stehule
_________________________________________________________________
Emotikony a pozadi programu MSN Messenger ozivi vasi konverzaci.
http://messenger.msn.cz/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-04 04:56:26 | Re: VALUES clause memory optimization |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2006-08-04 04:27:16 | Re: VALUES clause memory optimization |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-08-04 04:45:43 | Re: 8.2 features status |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-04 04:37:10 | Re: 8.2 features status |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-04 04:56:26 | Re: VALUES clause memory optimization |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2006-08-04 04:27:16 | Re: VALUES clause memory optimization |