Re: GSOC13 proposal - extend RETURNING syntax
От | David Fetter |
---|---|
Тема | Re: GSOC13 proposal - extend RETURNING syntax |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20130502183707.GD12887@fetter.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: GSOC13 proposal - extend RETURNING syntax (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: GSOC13 proposal - extend RETURNING syntax
Re: GSOC13 proposal - extend RETURNING syntax |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 01:40:59PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > David Fetter <david@fetter.org> writes: > > On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 06:28:53PM +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > >> prior/after? Both are unreserved keywords atm and it seems far less > >> likely to have conflicts than new/old. > > > BEFORE/AFTER seems more logical to me. > > Works for me. > > regards, tom lane Maybe we can make BEFORE and AFTER implied aliases rather than keywords. What say? Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: