From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: wCTE: about the name of the feature |
Date: | 2011-02-24 18:43:13 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTinmeuRUXJ21c9+DRz918kXba3GA8O0DVd4R+vVq@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> The wCTE patch refers to the feature it's adding as "DML WITH". I'm
> still pretty unhappy with that terminology. In my view of the world,
> "DML" includes SELECT as well as INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE. The wikipedia
> entry about the term
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Manipulation_Language
> agrees that that's at least the majority usage, and even our own docs
> seem to use it to include SELECT as often as not. Since the distinction
> is absolutely critical to talking about this feature sensibly, I don't
> think it's a good plan to use an acronym that is guaranteed to produce
> uncertainty in the reader's mind.
>
> The best idea I have at the moment is to spell out "data modifying
> command" (or "statement") rather than relying on the acronym.
> In the code, we could change hasDmlWith to hasModifyingWith, for
> example. The error messages could read like
> data-modifying statement in WITH is not allowed in a view
>
> Comments?
Great idea. I had the same complaint when I looked at this patch a
year ago, but didn't come up with nearly as good an idea as to what to
do about it.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David E. Wheeler | 2011-02-24 19:35:30 | Re: wCTE: about the name of the feature |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-02-24 17:18:44 | Re: SSI bug? |