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: 37F0CC78.EFA8B4B0@alumni.caltech.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
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

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

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