Tom Lane writes: > You write You get > > char(N) pg_catalog.bpchar > pg_catalog.char pg_catalog.char (not bpchar) > real pg_catalog.float4 > myschema.real myschema.real (not float4) > trim(BOTH foo) pg_catalog.btrim(foo) > pg_catalog.trim(BOTH foo) an error (since the special production > allowing BOTH won't be used)
Exactly my thoughts. > A corner case that maybe requires more discussion is what about type and > function names that are reserved per spec, but which we do not need any > special transformation for? For example, the spec thinks that > OCTET_LENGTH() is a keyword, but our implementation treats it as an > ordinary function name. I feel that the grammar should not prefix > "pg_catalog." to any name that it hasn't transformed or treated > specially in any way, even if that name is reserved per spec. I agree. -- Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
