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

Re: [HACKERS] Fixes gram.y

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Fernando Nasser <fnasser(at)redhat(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org,Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Fixes gram.y
Date: 2002-03-20 19:47:56
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Fernando Nasser <fnasser(at)redhat(dot)com> writes:
> Yes, I am supposed to see if I can fix this and get rid of the "into"
> field in SelectStmt at the same time.  Right Tom?

Yeah, we had talked about that ... but I'm not sure it's worth the
trouble.  I don't see any clean way for the SELECT grammar rule to
return info about an INTO clause, other than by including it in

Probably the easiest answer is for CreateCommandTag to just deal with
drilling down into the parsetree to see if INTO appears.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2002-03-20 19:47:59
Subject: Re: Proposal: 7.2b2 today
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2002-03-20 19:35:43
Subject: Firebird 2.0 moving to C++

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-03-20 20:08:53
Subject: Re: Domain Support -- another round
Previous:From: Fernando NasserDate: 2002-03-20 18:14:29
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Fixes gram.y

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