|From:||Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>|
|To:||Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, premanand <kottiprem(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org|
|Subject:||Re: MySQL search query is not executing in Postgres DB|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 15:27 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> It would be useful if we issued a NOTICE when an ambiguity is
> introduced, rather than when using it.
> Like Bison's reporting of reduce conflicts.
This brings up a very important point, which is that a lot of the code
is frozen in applications yet invisible at DDL time. So we have to be
careful that DDL changes have a reasonable impact on the ability to
continue to compile and execute the previously-working SQL received from
In other words, as I said in another reply, we want to avoid cases where
something seemingly innocuous (like creating a function) causes
previously-working SQL to fail due to ambiguity.
As Tom said, detecting the ambiguity at DDL time is not easy, so I'm not
suggesting that. And I know that creating a function can already cause
previously-working SQL to fail. I'm just saying we should be careful of
these situations and not make them more likely than necessary.
|Next Message||Pavel Stehule||2012-11-27 09:59:07||Re: gset updated patch|
|Previous Message||Andres Freund||2012-11-27 09:56:51||Re: ilist.h fails cpluspluscheck|