Re: EXTRACT Clarification

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Thomas F(dot) O'Connell" <tfo(at)sitening(dot)com>
Cc: Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: EXTRACT Clarification
Date: 2004-09-29 16:09:02
Message-ID: 29855.1096474142@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs pgsql-general

"Thomas F. O'Connell" <tfo(at)sitening(dot)com> writes:
> That seems reasonable, too, although I was interested to learn that
> this (and a few other expressions) weren't actually functions.

They are functions ... but not from the point of view of the grammar,
which has special productions for them to cope with SQL's whimsical
syntax requirements.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas F.O'Connell 2004-09-29 22:46:39 Re: EXTRACT Clarification
Previous Message Thomas F.O'Connell 2004-09-29 15:42:26 Re: EXTRACT Clarification

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Net Virtual Mailing Lists 2004-09-29 16:10:35 Re: Postgres inherited table, some questions...
Previous Message Thomas F.O'Connell 2004-09-29 15:42:26 Re: EXTRACT Clarification