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

Re: Updatable views/with check option parsing

From: "Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>
To: "Hannu Krosing" <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>,"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>,"Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>,<kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>,<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Updatable views/with check option parsing
Date: 2006-05-29 09:22:08
Message-ID: E1539E0ED7043848906A8FF995BDA579010E95E4@m0143.s-mxs.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> > While I don't think that making WITH a fully reserved word would
cause
> > any great damage, I'm unwilling to do it just to save a couple of
lines
> > of code. 
> 
> I think we should go on and do promote WITH to a reserved keyword now

Oracle, MS-SQL, DB2, MySQL and Informix also have WITH reserved, so it
would
imho be ok to do it if it simplifies code.

Andreas

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: ipigDate: 2006-05-29 11:06:35
Subject: some question about deadlock
Previous:From: James William PyeDate: 2006-05-29 07:00:57
Subject: Re: pg_proc probin misuse

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