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

Re: Thoughts on "SELECT * EXCLUDING (...) FROM ..."?

From: Darren Duncan <darren(at)darrenduncan(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Eric Ridge <eebbrr(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Thoughts on "SELECT * EXCLUDING (...) FROM ..."?
Date: 2011-10-30 19:28:45
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Darren Duncan <darren(at)darrenduncan(dot)net> writes:
>> The real question to ask ourselves is, if Eric Ridge is willing to do all the
>> work to implement this feature, and the code quality is up to the community 
>> standards and doesn't break anything else, then will the code be accepted?
> It's entirely possible that it will get bounced on standards-compliance
> grounds.  In particular, I don't think it's acceptable to introduce a
> new reserved keyword for this --- that would fall under the "fails to
> not break anything else" category.
> 			regards, tom lane

Well then we come up with a (SQL-level) syntax for the feature that doesn't 
introduce new reserved keywords.

As I said before, the important thing is to have the feature, and that the exact 
syntax is the main point to discuss.

Postgres already has a number of syntactic features that aren't in the SQL 
standard and coexist, and so we add one of those.

-- Darren Duncan

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Mark MielkeDate: 2011-10-30 19:38:01
Subject: Re: Thoughts on "SELECT * EXCLUDING (...) FROM ..."?
Previous:From: Eric RidgeDate: 2011-10-30 19:26:45
Subject: Re: Thoughts on "SELECT * EXCLUDING (...) FROM ..."?

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