Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
---|
From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | SQL:2011 features |
Date: | 2012-01-02 09:33:18 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nMJSmzqLD5YwBmfuc6R_2o77hqUB6nY_FkK=v2cP+yKh_Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Are there any features in SQL:2011 that we should be considering for 9.2?
We seem quite close on temporal stuff, so maybe just a little syntax work?
Not sure and not planning anything myself, just checking.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: SQL:2011 features |
Date: | 2012-01-02 18:47:40 |
Message-ID: | 1325530060.15294.4.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On mån, 2012-01-02 at 09:33 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Are there any features in SQL:2011 that we should be considering for 9.2?
>
> We seem quite close on temporal stuff, so maybe just a little syntax work?
I am aware of this piece on what's new in SQL:2011:
http://petereisentraut.blogspot.com/2010/04/news-from-sql-standard.html
Based on that:
* ALTER TABLE ... ALTER COLUMN ... SET/DROP NOT NULL: done since PG 7.3
* Constraints set to NO ENFORCE: Apparently no current interest; more
interest in the NOT VALID track at the moment.
* System-versioned tables: Hmm, just a little syntax work? Not sure how
much interest there is.
* Combined data change and retrieval: We decided against supporting the
standard syntax for this.
* Named arguments in function calls: done since PG 9.0; and we're
phasing out the => operator.
* Default values for function arguments: done since PG 9.0
From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: SQL:2011 features |
Date: | 2012-01-02 19:11:14 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nMJUcUUw64WHgnZyUs4zp4ueshUFXi221UQC_U2XAvjH-A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> On mån, 2012-01-02 at 09:33 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> Are there any features in SQL:2011 that we should be considering for 9.2?
>>
>> We seem quite close on temporal stuff, so maybe just a little syntax work?
>
> I am aware of this piece on what's new in SQL:2011:
> http://petereisentraut.blogspot.com/2010/04/news-from-sql-standard.html
I saw this as well, which seems quite different:
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: SQL:2011 features |
Date: | 2012-01-02 20:05:39 |
Message-ID: | CAFj8pRDLguTgTbRRtsOnkt1xLszaTt7j3fpnY_Kqai5MKqWPWQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello
2012/1/2 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>:
> On mån, 2012-01-02 at 09:33 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> Are there any features in SQL:2011 that we should be considering for 9.2?
trim_array can be simply implemented for one dim array. I am not sure
about semantic for multidim arrays.
Regards
Pavel
From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: SQL:2011 features |
Date: | 2012-01-02 23:57:46 |
Message-ID: | CF5AF689-CBB7-4BCB-B68B-95A1DD6B6A1C@justatheory.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Jan 2, 2012, at 10:47 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> * Named arguments in function calls: done since PG 9.0; and we're
> phasing out the => operator.
We don’t support `=>` for params yet, right? Still just `:=`?
David
From: | temporalcraig <craig(at)bitemporaldata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: SQL:2011 features |
Date: | 2012-01-03 13:11:23 |
Message-ID: | 1325596283579-5116875.post@n5.nabble.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I assume you guys know where to go to get the complete sql:2011 spec:
http://www.iso.org/iso/search.htm?qt=9075&searchSubmit=Search&sort=rel&type=simple&published=true
But if time/money is an issue the following seems to be the best publicly
available description of the temporal features:
http://metadata-standards.org/Document-library/Documents-by-number/WG2-N1501-N1550/WG2_N1536_koa046-Temporal-features-in-SQL-standard.pdf
If/as you all make progress with this we would love to hear about it in the
"Temporal Data" group on LinkedIn, where we are discussing temporal data in
general and the SQL:2011 extensions in particular.
http://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=&gid=3885228
We have had some excellent input from Jeff Davis in the past.
Craig
--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/SQL-2011-features-tp5114317p5116875.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.