Hannu Krosing writes:
> > ::=
> >
> > | OF
> > [ ]
> > [ ]
> to me it seems that only this is OR-d : | OF
>
>
> and the rest ([ ],[ ])is just
> optional
Nope. In that case it would read
::=
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > ::=
> >
> > | OF
> > [ ]
> > [ ]
>
> to me it seems that only this is OR-d : | OF
>
> and the rest ([ ],[ ])is just
> optional
The grammar is less t
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> One thing that bothered me is that my reading of the SQL99 draft
> disallows the UNDER syntax you are using. I read:
>
> ::=
> CREATE [ ] TABLE
>
> [ ON COMMIT ROWS ]
>
> ::=
>
>
"Robert B. Easter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I thought about this UNDER/INHERITS stuff months ago and wrote this file:
> http://www.comptechnews.com/~reaster/pgoo.html
Good analysis, especially the fundamental point that UNDER is only
designed to support single inheritance, whereas INHERITS a
> I am strongly inclined to rip out the pseudo-UNDER clause and support
> only the old-style INHERITS syntax for 7.1. UNDER is adding no
> functionality and I think we will eventually regret using an SQL keyword
> for non-SQL semantics.
I agree with you, Hannu, et al. If it isn't making a good e
I thought about this UNDER/INHERITS stuff months ago and wrote this file:
http://www.comptechnews.com/~reaster/pgoo.html
It might have something of value to someone. I'm not sure everything in the
file is correct though.
I remember the idea of UNDER is to be compatible with storing data from
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> They are all correct: UNDER is the new SQL99 syntax, INHERITS is the
> traditional Postgres syntax.
> >>
> >> Current docs do appear to be erroneous: they claim the UNDER phrase goes
> >> where INHERIT does, which is no
Tom Lane writes:
> I am strongly inclined to rip out the pseudo-UNDER clause and support
> only the old-style INHERITS syntax for 7.1. UNDER is adding no
> functionality and I think we will eventually regret using an SQL keyword
> for non-SQL semantics.
I agree.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAI
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
They are all correct: UNDER is the new SQL99 syntax, INHERITS is the
traditional Postgres syntax.
>>
>> Current docs do appear to be erroneous: they claim the UNDER phrase goes
>> where INHERIT does, which is not what the grammar thinks. I
