Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Having fixed that everything works fine with SET and WITH being reserved
> keywords. You didn't mean to say I should be able to leave WITH unreserved did
I think we'd decided that was a lost cause, unless you see a way?
> Of course that was the easy part...
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2007-01-27 05:04:40|
|Subject: Re: How does EXEC_BACKEND process signals? |
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2007-01-27 03:26:00|
|Subject: Re: BUG #2917: spi_prepare doesn't accept typename|