Re: Bug or stupidity

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>
Cc: Thomas Hallgren <thhal(at)mailblocks(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Bug or stupidity
Date: 2004-10-27 21:26:22
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-general

Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> writes:
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 22:10:05 +0200,
>> 2. Let's change so that "add_missing_from" is disabled by default and
>> doesn't affect the DELETE statement at all.

> That is supposed to happen. My memory was that 8.0 was the release that
> the default was going to change, but if not then it should be 8.1.

add_missing_from was only added in 7.4; the default behavior goes all
the way back because we inherited it from PostQUEL. It's probably
premature to flip the factory default after only one release cycle,
especially given the DELETE deficiency. A reasonable position is to
flip the default one release cycle after we fix the DELETE syntax.

It is interesting that SQL2003 allows an alias on the UPDATE or DELETE
target table; that was definitely not there in SQL99 or earlier. We'll
want to add that, for sure, but it is just a notational convenience.

There are several threads in the archives about how to fix the DELETE
syntax, but I don't think we ever really got consensus on what keyword
to use to introduce the auxiliary FROM clause.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Denis Zaitsev 2004-10-27 22:08:53 interval to seconds conversion. How?
Previous Message Terry Lee Tucker 2004-10-27 21:17:30 Question Regarding Locks