Re: [SQL] SQL92 compliance

Scott Marlowe wrote: > Would it be possible if we required postfix operators and related to > be inside parens? > > select x ~~ y as yabba > OR > select (x ~~ y) yabba That's pretty much what you get if you restrict the expression to c_expr. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~

Re: [SQL] SQL92 compliance

Tom Lane wrote: > I think it's a big stretch to say that that patch fixes it, since it > only allows an AS-less target expression to be c_expr rather than > a_expr as it ought to. Well, it works for a useful subset. I remember that some other database did not *allow* the AS, so there were portin

Re: [SQL] SQL92 compliance

On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 12:40, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Am Mittwoch, 23. August 2006 03:40 schrieb Daniel CAUNE: > >> Is AS in "SELECT my_column AS my_name FROM my_table" mandatory to be SQL92 > >> compliant? > > > No. I have a patch at > >

Re: [SQL] SQL92 compliance

Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Am Mittwoch, 23. August 2006 03:40 schrieb Daniel CAUNE: >> Is AS in "SELECT my_column AS my_name FROM my_table" mandatory to be SQL92 >> compliant? > No. I have a patch at >

Re: [SQL] SQL92 compliance

Am Mittwoch, 23. August 2006 03:40 schrieb Daniel CAUNE: > Is AS in "SELECT my_column AS my_name FROM my_table" mandatory to be SQL92 > compliant? No. I have a patch at that fixes this at least for 7.4. I don'

Re: [SQL] SQL92 compliance

On Aug 23, 2006, at 10:40 , Daniel CAUNE wrote: Hi, Is AS in "SELECT my_column AS my_name FROM my_table" mandatory to be SQL92 compliant? You can find this in the documentation: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/interactive/sql-select.html#AEN48391 The AS Key Word In the SQL standard,

[SQL] SQL92 compliance

Hi, Is AS in "SELECT my_column AS my_name FROM my_table" mandatory to be SQL92 compliant? PostgreSQL requires this keyword by default when defining alias, which might be good thing. I mean, I would prefer being notified from a syntax error than spending a couple of hours wondering why a client a

[SQL] Sql92..

Hi, I'm working in a database called frontbase..and I dont have a lot of exposure to SQL92.So can u provide me some feedback with some site or tutorials where in I can get myself acquainted with sql92. regards Narayanan begin:vcard n:Palasseri;Narayanan x-mozilla-html:TRUE org:GSI India adr:;;

[SQL] SQL92 and Traditional

Hello, I have a question. I am seeing lots of SQL92-compared-to-Traditional-SQL. What is a definition of "Traditional"? Is it SQL89? 86? Or anything before 92? It seems like postgresql supports both, but which is it better to write? Thanks, Tony