Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: RI and PARSER (was: Re: [HACKERS] RI status report #1)

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Jan Wieck <wieck(at)debis(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Postgres Hackers List <hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: RI and PARSER (was: Re: [HACKERS] RI status report #1)
Date: 1999-09-28 14:11:04
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
>     To  coordinate  with your work I've included my needs for the
>     SET CONSTRAINTS command below. I can wait a little  with  the
>     other  (CREATE  CONTRAINT TRIGGER) until you're done - except
>     you need to lock the parser for loooong time.

I didn't look *carefully*, but I'm sure this is all just fine. If you
have a chance, could you please try adding every new keyword to the
existing alphabetical list in ColId and/or ColLabel? In many cases
keywords which appear in only a limited context can still be allowed
in other places, and when we add new ones we tend to forget to update
this list.

I can do this later if you like; send me a note to remind me after you
commit your changes.

btw, since I'd already done some work on gram.y for join syntax the
patches to get it right aren't all that invasive in that file.

                    - Thomas

Thomas Lockhart				lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu
South Pasadena, California


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 1999-09-28 14:31:03
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Operator definitions
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 1999-09-28 13:45:30
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Patch for user-defined C-language functions

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group