Re: SEARCH and CYCLE clauses

From: Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SEARCH and CYCLE clauses
Date: 2021-02-22 10:05:09
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2/22/21 9:44 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 22.05.20 14:32, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> As an improvement over the spec, I think the vast majority of people
>>> will be using simple true/false values.  Can we make that optional?
>>>      CYCLE f, t SET is_cycle USING path
>>> would be the same as
>>>      CYCLE f, t SET is_cycle TO true DEFAULT false USING path
>> I was also considering that.  It would be an easy change to make.
> This change has been accepted into the SQL:202x draft.


> Here is a patch for it.

This looks good to me, except that you forgot to add the feature stamp.
Attached is a small diff to apply on top of your patch to fix that.
Vik Fearing

Attachment Content-Type Size
sql_features.diff text/x-patch 560 bytes

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Önder Kalacı 2021-02-22 10:45:11 Re: row filtering for logical replication
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2021-02-22 09:41:28 Re: repeated decoding of prepared transactions