Re: Updatable views/with check option parsing

From: "Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>
To: "Hannu Krosing" <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Updatable views/with check option parsing
Date: 2006-05-29 09:22:08
Message-ID: E1539E0ED7043848906A8FF995BDA579010E95E4@m0143.s-mxs.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > While I don't think that making WITH a fully reserved word would
cause
> > any great damage, I'm unwilling to do it just to save a couple of
lines
> > of code.
>
> I think we should go on and do promote WITH to a reserved keyword now

Oracle, MS-SQL, DB2, MySQL and Informix also have WITH reserved, so it
would
imho be ok to do it if it simplifies code.

Andreas

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message ipig 2006-05-29 11:06:35 some question about deadlock
Previous Message James William Pye 2006-05-29 07:00:57 Re: pg_proc probin misuse