Re: MySQL search query is not executing in Postgres DB

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: 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
Date: 2012-02-17 17:14:08
Message-ID: 28679.1329498848@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I remember there was a time when you couldn't say "SELECT a x FROM
> foo" in PostgreSQL. We told people that it was because our syntax was
> more flexible - we have postfix operators, or something.

Which it was, and yes that was the reason. We eventually thought of a
kluge solution that lets you omit "AS" 90% of the time, which is better
than nothing; but I doubt it would ever have been accepted if it weren't
a matter of improving standards compliance. I am pretty sure that the
SQL spec doesn't say that you should be able to apply LIKE directly to
an integer, so that issue isn't comparable to this one.

> I don't know whether a similar improvement is
> possible in this area, but we're certainly not going to get there by
> labeling the user's expectations as unreasonable. I don't think they
> are, and the people who wrote MySQL and Oracle evidently agree.

The people who wrote MySQL had very poor taste in a lot of areas, and
we are not going to blindly follow their lead. Oracle is not a terribly
presentable system either. Having said that, I don't object to any
clean improvements we can think of in this area --- but "make it work
more like MySQL" had better not be the only argument for it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2012-02-17 17:16:00 Re: Displaying accumulated autovacuum cost
Previous Message Robert Haas 2012-02-17 17:09:25 Re: Notes about fixing regexes and UTF-8 (yet again)