Re: PG 7.2b4 bug?

Tom Lane wrote:

> Don Baccus <dhogaza@pacifier.com> writes:
> 
>>Most language standards - at least the ones I've worked 
>>on - require compliant implementations to define and document 
>>implementation-defined behavior ...
>>
> 
> SQL99 saith:
> 
>          g) implementation-defined: Possibly differing between SQL-
>             implementations, but specified by the implementor for each
>             particular SQL-implementation.
> 
>          h) implementation-dependent: Possibly differing between SQL-
>             implementations, but not specified by ISO/IEC 9075, and not
>             required to be specified by the implementor for any particular
>             SQL-implementations.
> 
> Behavior of nondeterministic functions falls in the second category ...



Yep, those are the definitions I'm used to.  OK, then, since this is 
implementation-dependent, not implementation-defined, PG's off the hook 
entirely!

-- 
Don Baccus
Portland, OR
http://donb.photo.net, http://birdnotes.net, http://openacs.org