Re: SET TRANSACTION and SQL Standard
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SET TRANSACTION and SQL Standard |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 49676909.8060703@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SET TRANSACTION and SQL Standard (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: SET TRANSACTION and SQL Standard
Re: SET TRANSACTION and SQL Standard |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
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 section 19.1 syntax (1) >>> * p.957 section 17.3 syntax (2) >> Well, we allow a lot of things. Violations of the SQL standard happen >> when a command that appears in the standard doesn't do what the standard >> says. Allowing commands that are not in the standard is not a violation. > > Except when the standard explicitly forbids it, as with the above. No, it just means that the statement "SET TRANSACTION read only read write read only;" doesn't conform to the standard, and it's therefore implementation-dependent what it does. See the meaning of "shall" in Syntax Rules, section "6.3.3.2 Terms denoting rule requirements". I agree with Tom that the 2nd form is harmless, but we should throw an error for the first. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: