Tom Lane wrote:
> Don Baccus <dhogaza@pacifier.com> writes:
>
>>Most language standards - at least the ones I've worked
>>on - require compliant implementations to define and document
>>implementation-defined behavior ...
>>
>
> SQL99 saith:
>
> g) implementation-defined: Possibly differing between SQL-
> implementations, but specified by the implementor for each
> particular SQL-implementation.
>
> h) implementation-dependent: Possibly differing between SQL-
> implementations, but not specified by ISO/IEC 9075, and not
> required to be specified by the implementor for any particular
> SQL-implementations.
>
> Behavior of nondeterministic functions falls in the second category ...
Yep, those are the definitions I'm used to. OK, then, since this is
implementation-dependent, not implementation-defined, PG's off the hook
entirely!
--
Don Baccus
Portland, OR
http://donb.photo.net, http://birdnotes.net, http://openacs.org
