Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh

At 06:48 AM 2/29/00 +0000, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
>> > If not, I'd vote for pulling it out. That's a heck of a poor word to
>> > reserve.
>> I am afraid of lots of user complaints, even if we had not already used
>> TEMP.
>
>OK, but we've already got "user complaints" about TEMP being a
>reserved word, so that part seems to balance out. There is apparently
>no basis in published standards for TEMP being a reserved word. And
>btw it is not currently documented as a reserved word in
>syntax.sgml...

I vote for the SQL92 TEMPORARY. Let's not add a keyword that is non-standard
just because one or another commercial database makes use of it, unless
there's some real functionality to be gained that's not covered by the
standard.

TEMP is covered in SQL92 by TEMPORARY.

As an example of when adopting a construct from another commercial database
makes sense to me, SEQUENCE and SERIAL are both convenient means of generating
unique keys that have no equivalent in the standard.

- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
http://donb.photo.net.