Re: [HACKERS] Enhancing PGSQL to be compatible with Informix SQL
От | The Hermit Hacker |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Enhancing PGSQL to be compatible with Informix SQL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.BSF.4.21.0001061436550.18498-100000@thelab.hub.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Enhancing PGSQL to be compatible with Informix SQL (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Enhancing PGSQL to be compatible with Informix SQL
Re: [HACKERS] Enhancing PGSQL to be compatible with Informix SQL |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 6 Jan 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I've been wanting outer joins, but in my porting efforts have managed > > to work around them without too much difficulty, even though 6.5's > > limitations on subselects (not in target lists) requires that I > > create PL/pgSQL functions in some cases. > > > > I certainly can't speak for the majority of users, but as one data > > point I'd personally rather see outer joins done right (SQL 92 > > syntax) and wait a bit. > > > > Then again, I tend to be a bit of a language purist... > > > > Thomas has tried to explain the ANSI syntax for outer joins, and I must > say I am quite confused by it. A simple OUTER added before the column > name would be a quick and simple way to do outers, perhap get them into > 7.0, and allow new users to do outers without having to learn the quite > complex ANSI syntax. > > At least that was my idea. First, I'm for getting OUTER JOINs in ASAP...but, I'm a little concerned with thought of throwing in what *sounds* like a 'stop gap' measure... Just to clarify..."A simple OUTER added before the column" would be a PostgreSQL-ism? Sort of like Oracle and all the rest have their own special traits? Eventually, the plan is to implement OJs as "SQL92 spec", and leave our -ism in for backwards compatibility? Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy Systems Administrator @ hub.org primary: scrappy@hub.org secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: