Re: [HACKERS] Re: SQL compliance - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Re: SQL compliance
Date
Msg-id 4651.951064478@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Re: SQL compliance  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> On 2000-02-19, Tom Lane mentioned:
>> What we don't seem to have is full <table value constructor> per 7.2;
>> we only allow VALUES ... in INSERT, whereas SQL allows it in other
>> constructs where a sub-SELECT would be legal,

> Not required by Intermediate Level.

No, but it's useful enough that we should have it...
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Hannu Krosing
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: SQL compliance - why -- comments only at psql level?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: SQL compliance - why -- comments only at psql level?