On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 3:07 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > > Maybe the SQL standard has something to say about this? > > [ pokes around ... ] Yeah, it does, and I'd say it's pretty clearly > in agreement with what Peter did, so far as DML ops go. For instance, > this bit from SQL99's description of DELETE: > > 1) If the access mode of the current SQL-transaction or the access > mode of the branch of the current SQL-transaction at the current > SQL-connection is read-only, and T is not a temporary table, > then an exception condition is raised: invalid transaction state > - read-only SQL-transaction. > > UPDATE and INSERT say the same. (I didn't look at later spec versions, > since Peter's 2003 commit was probably based on SQL99.)
OK. That's good to know. > You could argue about exactly how to extend that to non-spec > utility commands, but for the most part allowing them seems > to make sense if DML is allowed. But I think we allow them on all tables, not just temp tables, so I don't think I understand this argument. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
