Tom Lane írta:
Zoltan Boszormenyi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Or not, it's just a bitter and late (because of my bitterness) response
to the rejection of my IDENTITY/GENERATED patches.
Where's the much praised standard behaviour on standard syntax?
So much for hypocrisy.

Hm?  There's a difference between extensions and failing to comply with
what the spec says is the behavior of the syntax it provides.

OK, that's where POVs and interpretations may differ. :-)
The standard says one thing (allow these and only these kinds of expressions)
which is a description of a behaviour, or can be interpreted as one.
Now, if you allow others as well, is it an extension or failing to comply? :-)

I have another question. How many features PostgreSQL have that copies
other DMBS' behaviour (say, because of easy porting) and as such,
differs slightly from the standard? Someone quoted DB2 during
the early life of my patch, and it seems to me after reading DB2's
behaves the was SERIAL behaves in PostgreSQL and the standard draft's
text can be interpreted that way as well.

I feel bad that you put so much work into what now seems to be a dead
end (at least until we can get some clarification about what the
committee really intends).  But look at the bright side: you learned
quite a bit about the innards of Postgres.  Hopefully your next project
will be more successful.

                        regards, tom lane

Thanks for the encouragement.
I just needed to blow the the steam off somehow.
Maybe the word "hypocrisy" was too harsh, sorry for that.
I will shut up now.

Zoltán Böszörményi
Cybertec Geschwinde & Schönig GmbH

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?


Reply via email to