On 12/15/20 5:13 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 09:48:54PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 2020-12-03 20:26, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2020-12-03 16:34, Tom Lane wrote:
> > As I recall, a whole lot of the pain we have with INTO has to do
> > with the semantics we've chosen
On 2020-12-17 02:30, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 06:07:08PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Right, we would very likely not add it now. But it doesn't seem to cause a
lot of ongoing maintenance burden, so if there is a use case, it's not
unreasonable to keep it around. I have
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 06:07:08PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Right, we would very likely not add it now. But it doesn't seem to cause a
> lot of ongoing maintenance burden, so if there is a use case, it's not
> unreasonable to keep it around. I have no other motive here, I was just
> curio
On 2020-12-15 23:13, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Do we really want to carry around confusing syntax for compatibility? I
doubt we would ever add INTO now, even for compatibility.
Right, we would very likely not add it now. But it doesn't seem to
cause a lot of ongoing maintenance burden, so if ther
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 09:48:54PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2020-12-03 20:26, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > On 2020-12-03 16:34, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > As I recall, a whole lot of the pain we have with INTO has to do
> > > with the semantics we've chosen for INTO in a set-operation nest.
>
On 2020-12-03 20:26, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 2020-12-03 16:34, Tom Lane wrote:
As I recall, a whole lot of the pain we have with INTO has to do
with the semantics we've chosen for INTO in a set-operation nest.
We think you can write something like
SELECT ... INTO foo FROM ... UNION SELE
On 2020-12-03 16:34, Tom Lane wrote:
As I recall, a whole lot of the pain we have with INTO has to do
with the semantics we've chosen for INTO in a set-operation nest.
We think you can write something like
SELECT ... INTO foo FROM ... UNION SELECT ... FROM ...
but we insist on the INTO bein
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> Interesting. This appears to be the case. SQL Server uses SELECT INTO
> to create a table, and does not appear to have CREATE TABLE AS.
> So maybe we should keep it, but adjust the documentation to point out
> this use case.
That argument makes sense, but only if ou
On 2020-12-03 00:54, Michael Paquier wrote:
I got to wonder about the impact when migrating applications
though. SELECT INTO has a different meaning in Oracle, but SQL server
creates a new table like Postgres.
Interesting. This appears to be the case. SQL Server uses SELECT INTO
to create a
On 2020-12-02 18:58, Stephen Frost wrote:
I also found some gratuitous uses of SELECT INTO in various tests and
documentation (not ecpg or plpgsql of course). Here is a patch to adjust
those to CREATE TABLE AS.
If we aren't actually removing SELECT INTO then I don't know that it
makes sense to
Stephen Frost schrieb am 02.12.2020 um 18:58:
> We should either remove it, or remove the comments that it's deprecated,
> not try to make it more deprecated or try to somehow increase the
> recommendation to not use it.
(I am writing from a "user only" perspective, not a developer)
I don't see a
On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 03:35:46PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah, if we want to kill it let's just do so. The negative language in
> the reference page has been there since (at least) 7.1, so people can
> hardly say they didn't see it coming.
+1. I got to wonder about the impact when migrating a
Stephen Frost writes:
> * Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com) wrote:
>> While reading about deprecating and removing various things in other
>> threads, I was wondering about how deprecated SELECT INTO is. There are
>> various source code comments about this, but the SELECT INTO
On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 12:58:36PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> * Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com) wrote:
> > While reading about deprecating and removing various things in
> > other threads, I was wondering about how deprecated SELECT INTO
> > is. There are va
Greetings,
* Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com) wrote:
> While reading about deprecating and removing various things in other
> threads, I was wondering about how deprecated SELECT INTO is. There are
> various source code comments about this, but the SELECT INTO reference page
>
st 2. 12. 2020 v 12:55 odesÃlatel Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> napsal:
> While reading about deprecating and removing various things in other
> threads, I was wondering about how deprecated SELECT INTO is. There are
> various source code comments about this, but the SELEC
> On 2 Dec 2020, at 12:54, Peter Eisentraut
> wrote:
> While reading about deprecating and removing various things in other threads,
> I was wondering about how deprecated SELECT INTO is. There are various
> source code comments about this, but the SELECT INTO reference page only
> contains
17 matches
Mail list logo
