Re: [GENERAL] Surprising syntax error

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [GENERAL] Surprising syntax error
Дата
Msg-id 7107.1219521623@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответы Re: [GENERAL] Surprising syntax error  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> Yes, I assumed we were following the recent work on ALTER TABLE/VIEW
> with GRANT/REVOKE.  Peter, Tom, how is GRANT/REVOKE different?

GRANT/REVOKE behavior is specified by the standard, whereas the stuff
we allow under ALTER VIEW is all an extension to the standard --- not
merely syntax-wise, but functionality.

A concrete reason not to do it is that if someone writes GRANT ON VIEW,
their code won't port to other DBs that are following the spec, and
it'll be only because we allowed non-spec syntactic sugar, not because
they're using functionality not covered by the spec.

We routinely complain about mysql inventing nonstandard ways to express
things that have perfectly good spec-compliant equivalents.  How would
this be different?
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Should enum GUCs be listed as such in config.sgml?
Следующее
От: "Robert Haas"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [GENERAL] Surprising syntax error