Re: polymorphic table functions light - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Vik Fearing
Subject Re: polymorphic table functions light
Date
Msg-id ff8610d7-b08b-2bba-57bf-155e94c28234@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: polymorphic table functions light  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: polymorphic table functions light  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: polymorphic table functions light  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 16/12/2019 22:13, Tom Lane wrote:
> That being the case, I'm not in favor of using up SQL syntax space for it
> if we don't have to.


Do I understand correctly that you are advocating *against* using
standard SQL syntax for a feature that is defined by the SQL Standard
and that we have no similar implementation for?


If so, I would like to stand up to it.  We are known as (at least one
of) the most conforming implementations and I hope we will continue to
be so.  I would rather we remove from rather than add to this page:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_vs_SQL_Standard

-- 

Vik Fearing




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] kqueue
Next
From: "tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com"
Date:
Subject: RE: Libpq support to connect to standby server as priority