Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I think it's time to bite the bullet and put in a lookahead filter.
>> What say you?
> Hmmm. Not real excited about that for performance reasons. Other options?
It's been in there for a month. I'll bet lunch you will be unable to
measure any perfor
> You'll probably recall that the ambiguity between NOT NULL and NOT
> DEFERRABLE gave us similar problems. We were able to get around that
> by pretending NOT DEFERRABLE is an independent clause and leaving some
> of the parsing work to be done by analyze.c, but I don't think that
> trick will w
