Re: Standard compliant DEFAULT clause

Tom Lane írta:
> Zoltan Boszormenyi <zb@cybertec.at> writes:
>
>> Or not, it's just a bitter and late (because of my bitterness) response
>> to the rejection of my IDENTITY/GENERATED patches.
>> Where's the much praised standard behaviour on standard syntax?
>> So much for hypocrisy.
>>
>
> Hm?  There's a difference between extensions and failing to comply with
> what the spec says is the behavior of the syntax it provides.
>

OK, that's where POVs and interpretations may differ. :-)
The standard says one thing (allow these and only these kinds of
expressions)
which is a description of a behaviour, or can be interpreted as one.
Now, if you allow others as well, is it an extension or failing to
comply? :-)

I have another question. How many features PostgreSQL have that copies
other DMBS' behaviour (say, because of easy porting) and as such,
differs slightly from the standard? Someone quoted DB2 during
the early life of my patch, and it seems to me after reading DB2's
online docs that GENERATED BY DEFAULT AS IDENTITY there
behaves the was SERIAL behaves in PostgreSQL and the standard draft's
text can be interpreted that way as well.

> I feel bad that you put so much work into what now seems to be a dead
> end (at least until we can get some clarification about what the
> committee really intends).  But look at the bright side: you learned
> quite a bit about the innards of Postgres.  Hopefully your next project
> will be more successful.
>
>             regards, tom lane
>

Thanks for the encouragement.
I just needed to blow the the steam off somehow.
Maybe the word "hypocrisy" was too harsh, sorry for that.
I will shut up now.

--
----------------------------------
Zoltán Böszörményi
Cybertec Geschwinde & Schönig GmbH
http://www.postgresql.at/