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

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "'pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-sql(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh
Date: 2000-02-29 06:48:06
Message-ID: 38BB6BA6.B5FACCAD@alumni.caltech.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql

> > 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...

- Thomas

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hiroshi Inoue 2000-02-29 07:06:29 RE: [HACKERS] Re: ALTER TABLE DROP COLUMN
Previous Message Thomas Lockhart 2000-02-29 06:43:03 Re: [HACKERS] interesting observatation regarding views and V7.0

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2000-02-29 10:54:06 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiples
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2000-02-29 05:59:12 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh