Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 31523.1504904977@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan
Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
> personally I prefer syntax without FOR keyword - because following keyword
> must be reserved keyword
> SET x = .., y = .. SELECT ... ;
Nope. Most of the statement-starting keywords are *not* fully reserved;
they don't need to be as long as they lead off the statement. But this
proposal would break that. We need to put FOR or IN or another
already-fully-reserved keyword after the SET list, or something's going
to bite us.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: