[ Sorry for the latency of my response, Chris -- this got buried in my
inbox... ]
Fabien COELHO wrote:
I don't know where these standards are available online... It seems they
are not available:-(
A copy that claims to represent an almost indistinuishable delta on the
actual SQL 2003 database
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 12:39:08PM -0400, Neil Conway wrote:
A copy that claims to represent an almost indistinuishable delta on the
actual SQL 2003 database standard is available online here:
http://www.wiscorp.com/sql/sql_2003_standard.zip
Those are PDFs AFAIR, not easily greppable ...
Alvaro Herrera Munoz wrote:
Those are PDFs AFAIR, not easily greppable
Not greppable, but any half-decent PDF viewer should have a search
feature that should allow much the same thing. Checking the index is
another way to go, although it is somewhat time-consuming.
I don't have access to an
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Fabien COELHO wrote:
Neil - can you check your SQL2003 copy to see if it mentions standard
aggregates on bit types?
I couldn't see any mention of any aggregates specific to the bit types,
There certainly are none, since in fact SQL2003 removes the BIT
Tom Lane wrote:
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Fabien COELHO wrote:
Neil - can you check your SQL2003 copy to see if it mentions standard
aggregates on bit types?
I couldn't see any mention of any aggregates specific to the bit types,
There certainly are none, since in fact
Would it be appropriate to contribute BIT_AND and BIT_OR aggregates
I am confused why you would use bit on integers
Well, (I think) I need them to manipulate pg_catalog's aclitem bitfields.
I plea not guilty for the design of pg_catalog;-)
Moreover, I added aclitem accessors which return
SELECT BIT_OR(aclitem_privs(...)) AS effective_privs
FROM ...
WHERE aclitem_grantee(...)=... AND ... ;
Is there anything in SQL2003 about such operators? If there is, we
should make sure we use the correct aggregate names.
Chris
---(end of
SELECT BIT_OR(aclitem_privs(...)) AS effective_privs
FROM ...
WHERE aclitem_grantee(...)=... AND ... ;
Is there anything in SQL2003 about such operators? If there is, we
should make sure we use the correct aggregate names.
That's a point!
I thought of BIT_* because it is short and
Is there anything in SQL2003 about such operators? If there is, we
should make sure we use the correct aggregate names.
That's a point!
I thought of BIT_* because it is short and also used by mysql.
Ingres has BIT_AND and BIT_OR functions, but they are not aggregates.
I don't know where these
I thought of BIT_* because it is short and also used by mysql.
Ingres has BIT_AND and BIT_OR functions, but they are not aggregates.
I don't know where these standards are available online... It seems they
are not available:-(
Neil - can you check your SQL2003 copy to see if it
Dear hackers,
still in the spirit of it may be useful to others, as it was to me, and
it does cost very little, and before submitting a small patch and being
exploded because it is obviously very stupid:
Would it be appropriate to contribute BIT_AND and BIT_OR aggregates
for integer types, with
Fabien COELHO wrote:
Dear hackers,
still in the spirit of it may be useful to others, as it was to me, and
it does cost very little, and before submitting a small patch and being
exploded because it is obviously very stupid:
Would it be appropriate to contribute BIT_AND and BIT_OR
12 matches
Mail list logo
