Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> writes: > That's how I read it, too. My hypothesis is that the standard adopted TABLE() > to rubber-stamp Oracle's traditional name for UNNEST().
Hmm ... plausible. > ... I propose merely changing the syntax to "TABLE FOR ROWS (...)". Ugh :-(. Verbose and not exactly intuitive, I think. I don't like any of the other options you listed much better. Still, the idea of using more than one word might get us out of the bind that a single word would have to be a fully reserved one. > ROWS FROM This one's a little less awful than the rest. What about "ROWS OF"? regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers