Re: SQL:2003 keyword additions
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SQL:2003 keyword additions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1101330055.4179.25.camel@localhost.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SQL:2003 keyword additions (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Список | pgsql-patches |
On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 10:02, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Simon Riggs wrote: > > If you are saying "we should not support the SQL standard with regard > > to the new reserved words added in SQL:2003", I would understand, but > > not agree. > > Conformance to the SQL standard is defined such that statements that are > specified in the standard should work precisely as specified in the > standard. It does *not* mean that statements that are not defined in > the standard should fail to work. Therefore, adding more reserved key > words than necessary does not achieve anything in terms of SQL > conformance. Returning to your original thought, the PostgreSQL reserved word list and the standard are not the same thing. I accept the core team's judgement that the two should not be the same, for various reasons. I have another suggestion on how to allow both to co-exist, which I will detail later on Hackers. -- Best Regards, Simon Riggs
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: