2010/11/9 Hitoshi Harada <umi.tanuki@gmail.com>:
> 2010/11/8 Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>:
>> 2010/11/8 Hitoshi Harada <umi.tanuki@gmail.com>:
>
>>> Hmm, this looks very different from our writeable CTEs. And I can see
>>> many issues like syntax ambiguity and execution order if we support
>>> it. AFAIK the most significant reason why we are working on CTEs is
>>> that CTEs are regarded as something like materialized table.
>>>
>>> So I think we are going on writeable "CTEs" unless there are no
>>> objection rather than pursuing the standard.
>>> Thanks for sharing anyway.
>>>
>>
>> I found, so writeable CTE was implemented in Microsoft SQL server too.
>> Can be our implementation compatible?
>>
>
> I don't believe MS SQL Server doesn't implement such our writeable
I mean, "I don't believe it implements..." :)
--
Hitoshi Harada
