Bruce Momjian wrote:
Is this what we want?  I don't think so.  I thought we wanted to
maintain the backward-compatible syntax of no FROM clause.

We do? Why?

It is just as noncompliant with the SQL spec as other variants of this behavior. add_missing_from would *always* have rejected those queries, so ISTM we have been discouraging this case for as long as add_missing_from has existed. If we want to allow this syntax by default, we will need to effectively redefine the meaning of add_missing_from -- which is fine, I just didn't think anyone wanted that.


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

Reply via email to