Re: BUG #1947: Enhancement Request - CONCAT() function - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Tony Marston
Subject Re: BUG #1947: Enhancement Request - CONCAT() function
Date
Msg-id 000001c5ccb9$06c33680$c800a8c0@ajmnotebook
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #1947: Enhancement Request - CONCAT() function  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: BUG #1947: Enhancement Request - CONCAT() function
List pgsql-bugs
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]=20
> Sent: 08 October 2005 22:30
> To: Jim C. Nasby
> Cc: Tony Marston; pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #1947: Enhancement Request - CONCAT()=20
> function=20
>=20
>=20
> "Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com> writes:
> > And you might want to make it a project at http://pgfoundry.org so=20
> > others can make use of it. You might also want to define it as=20
> > accepting an array; I think that would allow you to accept=20
> any number=20
> > of parameters.
>=20
> I think Tony is trying to avoid putting in any actual work=20
> ;-).  To me, the sanest change would be to modify his app to=20
> use the SQL-standard syntax.  Which surely is supported by=20
> those other databases too, no? And if not, why are *we* the=20
> ones getting the bug report?
>=20
>             regards, tom lane

You are getting this as a bug report for the simple reason that your website
does not seem to have a method of accepting enhancement requests. That is
why I specifically put ENHANCEMENT REQUEST in the description.

Tony Marston

http://www.tonymarston.net=20

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: "Tony Marston"
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #1937: Parts of information_schema only accessible to owner
Next
From: "Maher Abdel Karim"
Date:
Subject: BUG #1949: Inserting Unicode hindi numbers