Tom Lane írta:
=?iso-8859-2?Q?B=F6sz=F6rm=E9nyi_Zolt=E1n?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Well, I read all sections of 5WD-02-Foundation-2003-09.pdf
where "identity" appears, here are the list of changes that will
be needed for an identity column:
You're missing the hard part: NEXT VALUE FOR is sufficiently different
from nextval() that it will be very painful to implement. Until we have
a way of doing that, I think it would be unwise to use the SQL syntax
for things that don't behave the way the spec says. We might find that
spec-compliant sequences need to be a completely different object type,
or something equally evil. Right now, we have the freedom to do that
if that's what it takes. With the spec syntax already locked down as
generating PG-style sequences, we'd be hosed.
Do you mean the allowed and denied contexts of the
NEXT VALUE FOR expression in section 6.13?
(As opposed to nextval() which, as being a function
is allowed more broadly.) This part may still be described
with grammar, unless you mean something more suble.
I'm not too happy with converting SERIAL4 and SERIAL8 into reserved
words, either, as I believe this patch does.
Not really, only IDENTITY is added to the list of reserved words,
serial/serial4/serial8/bigserial are just type names:
You apparently haven't thought very hard about the consequences of what
you did to keywords.c. But I'll give you a hint: mapping distinct
strings to the same token is a bad idea.
OK, point taken.
Best regards,
Zoltán Böszörményi
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
