Re: Split-up ECPG patches - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Meskes
Subject Re: Split-up ECPG patches
Date
Msg-id 20090809170324.GA20702@feivel.credativ.lan
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Split-up ECPG patches  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Split-up ECPG patches
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Aug 08, 2009 at 04:57:57PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> The fundamental reason that there's a problem here is that ecpg has
> decided to accept a syntax that the backend doesn't (ie, FETCH with a
> fetch direction but no FROM/IN).  I think that that's basically a bad

Which was added because most if not all other precompilers allow this syntax
and of course it didn't do any harm until now.

> idea: it's not helpful to users to be inconsistent, and it requires ugly
> hacks in ecpg, and now ugly hacks in the core grammar as well.  We
> should resolve it either by taking out that syntax from ecpg, or by
> making the backend accept it too.  Not by uglifying the grammars some
> more in order to keep them inconsistent.

Couldn't agree more.

I'd like to figure out exactly what syntax other DBMSes accept. It appears
Informix allows the cursor name as a variable but has neither FORWARD/BACKWARD
nor FROM/IN. Zoltan, could you please check whether my docs are right? 

A quick google search seems to suggest that the same holds for Oracle that
apparently allows less options.

Michael
-- 
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo/Skype: michaelmeskes, Jabber: meskes@jabber.org
Go VfL Borussia! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: mixed, named notation support
Next
From: Michael Meskes
Date:
Subject: Re: Split-up ECPG patches