| 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 |
| Message-ID: | 82b6e6ca-e138-81a6-673d-20cfbdc4ec3e@postgresfriends.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| 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.
Yay!
> 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 |
| 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 |