Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Lockhart
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh
Date
Msg-id 38BB6BA6.B5FACCAD@alumni.caltech.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh  (Don Baccus <dhogaza@pacifier.com>)
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] prob with aggregate and group by - returns multiplesh  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> > If not, I'd vote for pulling it out.  That's a heck of a poor word to
> > reserve.
> I am afraid of lots of user complaints, even if we had not already used
> TEMP.

OK, but we've already got "user complaints" about TEMP being a
reserved word, so that part seems to balance out. There is apparently
no basis in published standards for TEMP being a reserved word. And
btw it is not currently documented as a reserved word in
syntax.sgml...
                    - Thomas

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


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Lockhart
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] interesting observatation regarding views and V7.0
Next
From: "Hiroshi Inoue"
Date:
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Re: ALTER TABLE DROP COLUMN