Re: pl/pgsql: END verbosity

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pl/pgsql: END verbosity
Date: 2005-06-26 15:57:57
Message-ID: 200506261757.57857.peter_e@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Neil Conway wrote:
> No, it isn't -- PL/PgSQL is not defined by the SQL standard. I guess
> you're referring to SQL/PSM, but that has only a passing resemblance
> to PL/PgSQL. Implementing SQL/PSM in some form would definitely be
> worth doing (especially now that MySQL have), but I haven't seen any
> plans to do that by adapting PL/PgSQL to SQL/PSM.

I don't claim to recall the details, but we have frequently referred to
the SQL standard when resolving issues about PL/pgSQL's syntax.

> In any case, there are plenty of cases in which we accept a superset
> of the syntax defined by the SQL standard -- DROP TABLE { RESTRICT |
> CASCADE }, for example. We have never interpreted compliance with the
> SQL specification to mean that we must *only* accept the standard's
> syntax and nothing else.

The cases were we accept a superset of the SQL standard are either
additional features, backward compatibility, or compatibility to other
systems -- none of which seem to apply here.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2005-06-26 17:14:11 Re: tsearch2 changes need backpatching?
Previous Message Neil Conway 2005-06-26 15:24:54 Re: pl/pgsql: END verbosity

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Petr Jelínek 2005-06-26 17:46:32 Re: limiting connections per user/database
Previous Message Neil Conway 2005-06-26 15:24:54 Re: pl/pgsql: END verbosity