Re: Book and TEMP vs. TEMPORARY

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Book and TEMP vs. TEMPORARY
Date: 2000-04-06 16:41:40
Message-ID: 200004061641.MAA23469@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > > TEMPORARY is SQL92 standard, TEMP is not. Nuff said...
> > OK, but TEMPORARY doesn't work on 6.5.*, right?
>
> Sure it does (at least as far as I can tell. The test/locale stuff has
> screwed up CVS update, so I have to do a clean checkout of at least
> that directory to get my tree back in shape :(
>
> And, to beat a dead horse, I'm *still* not sure why we are carrying
> along the "TEMP" variant, losing the use of that name for other
> things.

Well, Tom Lane made it so we allow TEMP as an indentifier. I now
remember that the issue with 7.0 was that everyone beat up on me because
I used TEMP instead of the SQL92-standard TEMPORARY when implementing
temporary tables. See, it works now:

test=> create table x ( temp char(2));
CREATE

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Karel Zak 2000-04-06 16:42:41 RE: pg_dumplo, thanks :) (fwd)
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2000-04-06 16:29:57 Re: Temporary indexes