Re: [sqlite] New word to replace "serverless"
On 2020-1-28 7:11 am, John McMahon wrote: Define what "serverless" means to you in the SQLite context and provide a link or pop-up to that definition wherever "serverless" occurs in the documentation. Perhaps also include what it doesn't mean if you think this is becoming an issue. How others choose to define "serverless" should not be your problem. Just my pennies worth, John ...and my penny would be an English penny in stating it as "server-less" rather than serverless. Best Regards, Mohit. 2020-2-2 | 10:59 pm. ___ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Re: [sqlite] Check constrain execution timing change? (Now a bug)
On 2/2/20, Thomas Kurz wrote:
> And are there any consequences for something like
>
>> create table x (x text check (typeof(x) == 'text'));
>> insert into x values ('1');
>
Not that I know of.
--
D. Richard Hipp
d...@sqlite.org
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Re: [sqlite] Check constrain execution timing change? (Now a bug)
And are there any consequences for something like
> create table x (x text check (typeof(x) == 'text'));
> insert into x values ('1');
?
- Original Message -
From: Richard Hipp
To: SQLite mailing list
Sent: Sunday, February 2, 2020, 00:50:34
Subject: [sqlite] Check constrain execution timing change? (Now a bug)
On 2/1/20, Thomas Kurz wrote:
> Does this mean there will be no possibility to prevent inserting a string
> into an integer column anymore?
> create table x (x integer check (typeof(x) == 'integer'));
> insert into x values ('1');
> --> will pass in future versions???
I think that is what it means. yes.
--
D. Richard Hipp
d...@sqlite.org
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Re: [sqlite] "Standard SQL" ?
> On 1 Feb 2020, at 23:31, James K. Lowden wrote: > > Similarly, last I checked, no SQL standard supported LIMIT for SELECT. Just FYI: The the functionality of LIMIT was added to the SQL standard ISO/IEC 9075 with the 2008 update in form of FETCH FIRST … ROWS ONLY This clause also support some variants like FETCH FIRST 10 PERCENT ONLY and also a WITH TIES modifier. All of that is still there in the current version of the SQL standard (from 2016). I would say LIMIT is widely supported, but it is not standard SQL, maybe common SQL. > > On the positive side, some parts of SQL haven't changed since the Late > Bronze Age. "SELECT *" still means all columns; "FROM" still takes a > table argument, whether a tablename, view, or expression. "WHERE" > operates on values "before" aggregation; "HAVING" on values "after" > aggregation. Any implementation that operates any other way does not > implement standard SQL. > > SQL is hardly unique in this regard. We also refer to "the" C standard > library, to "Posix", and to "the" C or C++ standard. Like SQL, there > are many such and (also like SQL) some parts are unchanged since the > beginning while, just as usefully, some that weren't part of the > first standard haven't changed since they were introduced. When you say “many standards” do you mean the different releases those standards have? IMHO, there is only one SQL standard, namely ISO/IEC 9075. The current and technically only valid version is that of 2016 (even though an extension was added in 2019). -markus ___ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
