(Moved to -hackers)
> Rod Taylor <rbt@rbt.ca> writes:
> > Are you ok with the DB2 and draft-spec syntax of NEXT VALUE FOR (where
> > value is not a reserved word)? Or should I hold onto that until the
> > spec has gone through the final draft / release?
>
> By that time we'll have done the Oracle-style foo.nextval, and it'll
> become kind of a moot point ;-)
I actually like the NEXT VALUE FOR a lot more. The reason is that the
Oracle syntax is very much an 'object.property' lookup, which we do nowhere
else in PostgreSQL. In fact, it's actually a bit bizarre when you start
going database.schema.sequence.nextval, etc.
The NEXT VALUE FOR syntax would be more in keeping with our current sytacies
methinks...
Chris