| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
|---|
| From: | Unicron <ssmei_2000(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | My review for the patch "Table command" |
| Date: | 2008-11-06 05:26:18 |
| Message-ID: | 850603.14426.qm@web62408.mail.re1.yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi
I have completed the review for Patch "Table command", Here is results
1. The patch actually implements that.
2. The feature work as advertised.
3. So far, I have not found any possible dangers that can be caused by this pacth
4. Since it is just an alternative to "select * from Table", I think this feature is
unneccessary.
Unicron
| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: My review for the patch "Table command" |
| Date: | 2008-11-06 17:22:24 |
| Message-ID: | 491327D0.5060704@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Unicron,
> 4. Since it is just an alternative to "select * from Table", I think
> this feature is
> unneccessary.
Heh. I agree, but tell that to the SQL committee.
I don't think we need to argue out the merits of adding standard syntax.
This patch is Ready for Code Review.
--Josh
| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: My review for the patch "Table command" |
| Date: | 2008-11-06 17:51:44 |
| Message-ID: | 2231.1225993904@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> Unicron,
>> 4. Since it is just an alternative to "select * from Table", I think
>> this feature is unneccessary.
> Heh. I agree, but tell that to the SQL committee.
> I don't think we need to argue out the merits of adding standard syntax.
We can, however, argue the merits of making extensive documentation
changes to document such a useless "feature".
regards, tom lane