Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 16:14 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> Simon Riggs wrote:
> >>> I notice that we allow commands such as
> >>>
> >>> SET TRANSACTION read only read write read only;
> >>>
> >>> BEGIN TRANSACTION read only read only read only
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> I think this might be best solved by providing a common function that
> checks a DefElem list for duplicates. This could be used in a number of
> other places as well (grep for "conflicting or redundant options").
It's not clear what that would save exactly. The com
Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut writes:
Simon Riggs wrote:
I notice that we allow commands such as
SET TRANSACTION read only read write read only;
BEGIN TRANSACTION read only read only read only;
My own feeling is that the second example is okay but the first should
be rejected, since (a)
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 11:20 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs writes:
> > "If any condition required by Syntax Rules is not satisfied when the
> > evaluation of Access or General Rules is attempted and the
> > implementation is neither processing non-conforming SQL language nor
> > processing
Simon Riggs writes:
> "If any condition required by Syntax Rules is not satisfied when the
> evaluation of Access or General Rules is attempted and the
> implementation is neither processing non-conforming SQL language nor
> processing conforming SQL language in a non-conforming manner, then an
>
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 17:11 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 16:14 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> Simon Riggs wrote:
> >>> I notice that we allow commands such as
> >>>
> >>> SET TRANSACTION read only read write read only;
> >>>
> >>> BEGIN TRANS
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 16:14 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
I notice that we allow commands such as
SET TRANSACTION read only read write read only;
BEGIN TRANSACTION read only read only read only;
Unsurprisingly, these violate the SQL Standard:
* p.977 se
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 16:14 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > I notice that we allow commands such as
> >
> > SET TRANSACTION read only read write read only;
> >
> > BEGIN TRANSACTION read only read only read only;
> >
> > Unsurprisingly, these violate the SQL Standard:
>
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>> I notice that we allow commands such as
>> SET TRANSACTION read only read write read only;
>> BEGIN TRANSACTION read only read only read only;
> Well, we allow a lot of things. Violations of the SQL standard happen
> when a command that appears i
Simon Riggs wrote:
I notice that we allow commands such as
SET TRANSACTION read only read write read only;
BEGIN TRANSACTION read only read only read only;
Unsurprisingly, these violate the SQL Standard:
* p.977 section 19.1 syntax (1)
* p.957 section 17.3 syntax (2)
Well, we allow a lot of
I notice that we allow commands such as
SET TRANSACTION read only read write read only;
BEGIN TRANSACTION read only read only read only;
Unsurprisingly, these violate the SQL Standard:
* p.977 section 19.1 syntax (1)
* p.957 section 17.3 syntax (2)
Not planning on fixing it myself, but others m
11 matches
Mail list logo
