| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] COPY .... (FORMAT binary) syntax doesn't work |
| Date: | 2013-05-27 10:37:26 |
| Message-ID: | CA+U5nML_ZrR2=ioFH4+edsPz=e7LgHq7e=u0BCd6pXsGidD9vQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
On 26 May 2013 17:10, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> writes:
> More readable would be to invent an intermediate nonterminal falling
> between ColId and ColLabel, whose expansion would be "IDENT |
> unreserved_keyword | col_name_keyword | type_func_name_keyword", and
> then replace ColId_or_Sconst with whatever-we-call-that_or_Sconst.
> Any thoughts about a name for that new nonterminal?
Do you think complicating the parser in that way is worth the trouble
for this case? Could that slow down parsing?
We don't actually have to fix it; clearly not too many people are
bothered, since no complaints in 3 years. Documenting 'binary' seems
better.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2013-05-27 12:36:48 | Re: BUG #8176: problem with the "ALTER TYPE name RENAME TO new_name [ CASCADE | RESTRICT ]" syntax |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2013-05-27 10:31:38 | Re: COPY .... (FORMAT binary) syntax doesn't work |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2013-05-27 10:47:19 | Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review] |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2013-05-27 10:31:38 | Re: COPY .... (FORMAT binary) syntax doesn't work |