"Jim Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, I think you are correct on that. I was misreading column reference for
> column name. Would it be difficult to patch my local copy to either permit
> this or strip off the characters from the qualifier portion in the parser?
[shrug...] You could probably hack the grammar to throw away a
qualifier there, but wouldn't it be easier to fix your incorrect SQL?
AFAICS, SQL92 does not allow a qualified name there, and SQL99 does but
appears to assign it some completely other semantics than what you're
expecting --- looks like an object method call of some kind... so you
are in for trouble in the long run if you don't fix your code.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match
