Re: Re: FILTER for aggregates [was Re: Department of Redundancy Department: makeNode(FuncCall) division] - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Re: FILTER for aggregates [was Re: Department of Redundancy Department: makeNode(FuncCall) division]
Date
Msg-id 13987.1372085940@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: FILTER for aggregates [was Re: Department of Redundancy Department: makeNode(FuncCall) division]  (Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>)
List pgsql-hackers
Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu> writes:
> I think their model is that applications work with a certain version
> of SQL and they're not expected to work with a new version without
> extensive updating.

Hm.  We could invent a "sql_version" parameter and tweak the lexer to
return keywords added in spec versions later than that as IDENT.
However, I fear such a parameter would be a major PITA from the user's
standpoint, just like most of our backwards-compatibility GUCs have
proven to be.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: patch submission: truncate trailing nulls from heap rows to reduce the size of the null bitmap [Review]
Next
From: Dimitri Fontaine
Date:
Subject: Re: [9.4 CF 1] The Commitfest Slacker List