Re: per-column generic option

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Shigeru Hanada <shigeru(dot)hanada(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: per-column generic option
Date: 2011-07-11 15:44:04
Message-ID: 1310399044.27274.0.camel@vanquo.pezone.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On lör, 2011-07-09 at 23:49 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> The new ALTER TABLE grammar seems a bit strange -- ADD, SET, DROP. Is
> this defined by the SQL/MED standard? It seems at odds with our
> handling of attoptions

Well, I believe the SQL/MED options were actually implemented first and
the attoptions afterwards. But it's probably not unwise to keep them
separate, even though the syntaxes could have been made more similar.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2011-07-11 15:44:17 Re: Select For Update and Left Outer Join
Previous Message Florian Pflug 2011-07-11 15:43:59 Re: Need help understanding pg_locks