Re: [HACKERS] Almost there on column aliases - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Lockhart
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Almost there on column aliases
Date
Msg-id 38AAC6D0.2B0AB8C@alumni.caltech.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Almost there on column aliases  (Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Almost there on column aliases
Re: [HACKERS] Almost there on column aliases
List pgsql-hackers
> >> BTW, the rule regress test is presently failing because I modified
> >> ruleutils.c to dump the Attr list if it is not null, rather than
> >> only if the refname is different from the relname:

I'm currently (2000-02-16 15:40 GMT) seeing the rules test
blank-filling the "bpchar" fields. Do you see that?

> > istm that the column aliases (rte->ref->attrs) should not be written out
> > if the table alias (rte->ref->relname) is not written.
> Hmm.  If it's not possible to specify column aliases without specifying
> a table-name alias, then that's OK ... but I thought table aliases were
> optional.

I've just looked it up in the Date book: table aliases are optional in
general, but column aliases require a table alias. The bnf looks like
 table [ [ AS ] range-variable [ ( column-commalist ) ] ]
                       - Thomas

-- 
Thomas Lockhart                lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Solution for LIMIT cost estimation
Next
From: Lamar Owen
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Postgres meets InterBase (ZDNet)