On tis, 2011-03-08 at 20:52 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > I think we should drop <collate clause> from TypeName and just have it > in columnDef and the expression syntax.
Yes, that sounds better in retrospect. It's easier to see that now that we see all the cases where it's used and not used. > This might also ease the > ambiguity problem that evidently led you to restrict the expression > production's argument to c_expr. Maybe, but I seem to recall that I did actually check and concluded that c_expr covers all cases where <collate clause> is allowed. We could of course allow more cases, but maybe it's not necessary. > It would also allow us to meet the > letter of the spec for <column definition>, in that <collate clause> > is not required to immediately follow <data type>. Note that that case is listed under a separate feature. I'm not sure if it's worth supporting, but if they bothered putting it in it's probably for compatibility with some existing implementation. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers