On 9/4/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> But on further thought it strikes me that insisting on all lower case
> doesn't eliminate case-sensitivity portability problems. For instance,
> suppose the given parameter is 'foo' and the actual file name is
> Foo.dict. This will work fine
On 9/3/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Ben Tilly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > That raises a very random thought. One of the nicer features of
> > Oracle is the ability to have function-based indexes. So you could
> > index, say, t
On 9/3/07, Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Kenneth Marshall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 10:41:22PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Kenneth Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> > ... This is the rough plan. Does anyone see anything critical that
> >> > i
On 9/3/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> I'm not convinced that . is issue-free. On most if not all versions of
> >> Unix,
> >> you are allowed to open a directory as a file and read the filenames it
On 9/3/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On the other hand, this means the name has to be quoted if it would be
> > quoted as an SQL identifier, right?
>
> Something like that. I wasn't planning on rejecting uppercase letters,
> though, which
On 8/23/07, Florian G. Pflug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ben Tilly wrote:
> > On 8/22/07, Michael Glaesemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Aug 22, 2007, at 20:49 , Ben Tilly wrote:
> >>
> >>> If your implementation accepts:
> >>>
On 8/23/07, Michael Glaesemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 23, 2007, at 10:47 , Ben Tilly wrote:
[...]
> > Why does it seem like a bug to you?
> >
> > Turn it around, and tell me in what way is its behaviour surprising to
> > someone who knows SQL. You as
On 8/23/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Chuck McDevitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Tom, it isn't just a case of "convenience". When we are trying to
> > convert users from another database (say Oracle for example) to
> > PostgeSQL, one of the big stumbling blocks that slows down th
On 8/22/07, Michael Glaesemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 22, 2007, at 20:36 , Ben Tilly wrote:
[...]
> > I can well believe that the standard says that you must accept
> > subqueries with aliases. But does it say you must reject subqueries
> > without a
On 8/23/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Ben Tilly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ... But then I need this (possibly
> > empty) list to have a valid group by statement at the end. In Oracle
> > I used to just write it like this:
>
&g
On 8/22/07, Michael Glaesemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 22, 2007, at 20:49 , Ben Tilly wrote:
>
> > If your implementation accepts:
> >
> > group by case when true then 'foo' end
>
> What would that mean? Regardless of whether or n
On 8/22/07, Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Ben Tilly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hopefully this is the right place for a few feature requests that
> > would address some of the things that I've noticed in postgres.
> >
>
On 8/22/07, Michael Glaesemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 22, 2007, at 18:45 , Ben Tilly wrote:
>
> > 1. Just a minor annoyance, but why must subqueries in FROM clauses
> > have an alias?
>
> It's required by the SQL standard, AIUI. I wonder what En
Hopefully this is the right place for a few feature requests that
would address some of the things that I've noticed in postgres.
1. Just a minor annoyance, but why must subqueries in FROM clauses
have an alias? For instance suppose that I have an orders table, and
one of the fields is userid. T
14 matches
Mail list logo
