Re: Syntax conflicts in frame clause

From: Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Syntax conflicts in frame clause
Date: 2009-11-25 01:03:11
Message-ID: e08cc0400911241703u4bf53ek1c3910605a3d8778@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2009/11/25 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Rewriting my frame support types patch to allow any expression in
>> PRECEDING/FOLLOWING clause, I found the syntax below in PG conflicts:
>
> Yeah, we ran into that in the original WINDOW patch IIRC, and found some
> solution to it that got taken out again when the functionality was cut
> down for 8.4.  You might want to look back to see what that looked like;
> I think we avoided reserving BETWEEN at the cost of making the
> productions a bit more redundant.

Oops, I've forgot that :(

http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/6363.1229890896@sss.pgh.pa.us

At the time you put BETWEEN as reserved_keyword, but my trial showed
col_name_keyword can also be a candidate.

Regards,

--
Hitoshi Harada

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2009-11-25 01:22:15 Re: Hot standby and removing VACUUM FULL
Previous Message Konstantin Izmailov 2009-11-25 01:03:03 pg_attribute.attnum - wrong column ordinal?