Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Hans-Juergen Schoenig wrote:
>
> >
> > why do we agree on a patch, implement it and reject it then?
> > would be easier to reject it before actually implementing it ...
> > it is quite hard to explain to a customer that something is rejected
> > after approval - even if things are written properly ...
> >
> >
>
>
> That's a good point and I understand the pain.
>
> Could we maybe do this?: Take the patch as it is now, and if/when we
> get the more general syntax we do a little magic under the hood to turn
> COPY viewname TO
> into
> COPY (select * from viewname) TO
We could. But we would do it because we want that behavior on its own,
rather than doing it just to support a feature we added in the past.
The question is, if we were adding the query syntax _now_, would we want
to do views that way? If so, we can add the patch and just fix it up
when we get the queries.
--
Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +