Thread: ORDER BY in definition of views
Guys, Does anyone know if this is on the radar for 7.1? Niall -- Niall Smart email: niall.smart@ebeon.com phone: (087) 8052390
<p><font size="2">Would there be a particular reason to do this?</font><p><font size="2">MikeA</font><br /><p><font size="2">>> -----Original Message-----</font><br /><font size="2">>> From: Niall Smart [<a href="mailto:niall.smart@ebeon.com">mailto:niall.smart@ebeon.com</a>]</font><br/><font size="2">>> Sent: 08 June2000 14:47</font><br /><font size="2">>> To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org</font><br /><font size="2">>> Subject:[SQL] ORDER BY in definition of views</font><br /><font size="2">>> </font><br /><font size="2">>> </font><br /><font size="2">>> Guys,</font><br /><font size="2">>> </font><br /><fontsize="2">>> Does anyone know if this is on the radar for 7.1?</font><br /><font size="2">>> </font><br/><font size="2">>> Niall</font><br /><font size="2">>> </font><br /><font size="2">>> --</font><br /><font size="2">>> Niall Smart</font><br /><font size="2">>> </font><br/><font size="2">>> email: niall.smart@ebeon.com</font><br /><font size="2">>> phone: (087) 8052390</font><br/><font size="2">>> </font>
Michael Ansley wrote: > > Would there be a particular reason to do this? > I like to define views for lookups (i.e. job titles, departments, accounts, whatever). It would be nice if I could just do a select * from whatever_vw instead of having to remember to put the order by whatever_name clause. Admittedly its no biggie, but it is nice-to-have. Niall
Niall Smart <niall.smart@ebeon.com> writes:
> Does anyone know if this is on the radar for 7.1?
7.2 ...
regards, tom lane
Niall Smart wrote: > Guys, > > Does anyone know if this is on the radar for 7.1? Yes, it is not. Jan -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #