Re: RI and PARSER (was: Re: [HACKERS] RI status report #1)

From: wieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck)
To: lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu (Thomas Lockhart)
Cc: wieck(at)debis(dot)com, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: RI and PARSER (was: Re: [HACKERS] RI status report #1)
Date: 1999-09-28 17:58:09
Message-ID: m11W1Vx-0003kLC@orion.SAPserv.Hamburg.dsh.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thomas Lockhart wrote:

> > To coordinate with your work I've included my needs for the
> > SET CONSTRAINTS command below. I can wait a little with the
> > other (CREATE CONTRAINT TRIGGER) until you're done - except
> > you need to lock the parser for loooong time.
>
> I didn't look *carefully*, but I'm sure this is all just fine. If you
> have a chance, could you please try adding every new keyword to the
> existing alphabetical list in ColId and/or ColLabel? In many cases
> keywords which appear in only a limited context can still be allowed
> in other places, and when we add new ones we tend to forget to update
> this list.

Just tell me which of these SQL3 "reserved" keywords
(according to the SQL3 draft I got from Vadim) should be
available for column ID or Label:

CONSTRAINTS
DEFERRABLE
DEFERRED
IMMEDIATE
INITIALLY
PENDANT
RESTRICT

Then I'll add them before committing. Overlooking the syntax
of my new commands, it wouldn't hurt to add them all to these
lists. But should SQL3 reserved words really be in them?

Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#========================================= wieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck) #

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1999-09-28 18:03:56 Re: [HACKERS] PG_UPGRADE status
Previous Message John Ridout 1999-09-28 17:31:19 MS Access upsizing