Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh
Дата
Msg-id 28927.951836276@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh  (Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>)
Список pgsql-sql
>>>> If not, I'd vote for pulling it out.  That's a heck of a poor word to
>>>> reserve.
>> I am afraid of lots of user complaints, even if we had not already used
>> TEMP.

> OK, but we've already got "user complaints" about TEMP being a
> reserved word, so that part seems to balance out. There is apparently
> no basis in published standards for TEMP being a reserved word. And
> btw it is not currently documented as a reserved word in
> syntax.sgml...

The real problem is not that we accept TEMP as a synonym for TEMPORARY;
it is that we treat TEMP as a reserved word.  What are the chances that
we could make it a member of the ColId list?  I am thinking that
"... INTO TEMP temp" is *not* ambiguous given one token lookahead...
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-sql по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Don Baccus
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh