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

Re: add label to enum syntax

From: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: add label to enum syntax
Date: 2010-10-26 18:46:56
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 26 October 2010 17:04, David E. Wheeler <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> wrote:
> On Oct 26, 2010, at 7:15 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> Notwithstanding the above, I don't think ELEMENT would be a very bad choice.
>> I still think we should just go for LABEL and be done with it.  But
>> y'all can ignore me if you want...
> +1

Well ELEMENT is a reserved keyword in SQL:2008, to support multisets,
so if we ever supported that feature...

But I don't feel strongly about this. I think the overall consensus so
far is in favour of LABEL.


In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jeff DavisDate: 2010-10-26 18:53:27
Subject: Re: foreign keys for array/period contains relationships
Previous:From: David FetterDate: 2010-10-26 18:31:45
Subject: EOCF

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