Re: insert statements

I'm trying to use latest version of PostNuke which uses adodb for the
database layer. The problem is in the insert and update statements.
For example:

insert into foo(foo.a) values(1);

fails because the table name is used. Update statements also include the
table name. Both fail. Does anyone know of a workaround?

Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com http://www.pop4.net
56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================

Vince Vielhaber writes:

> For example:
>
> insert into foo(foo.a) values(1);
>
> fails because the table name is used. Update statements also include the
> table name. Both fail. Does anyone know of a workaround?

Completely loudly to whomever wrote that SQL. It's completely
non-standard.

(The implication I'm trying to make is that there's no way to make
PostgreSQL accept that statement. Adding this as an extension has been
rejected in the past.)

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> Vince Vielhaber writes:
>
> > For example:
> >
> > insert into foo(foo.a) values(1);
> >
> > fails because the table name is used. Update statements also include the
> > table name. Both fail. Does anyone know of a workaround?
>
> Completely loudly to whomever wrote that SQL. It's completely
> non-standard.
>
> (The implication I'm trying to make is that there's no way to make
> PostgreSQL accept that statement. Adding this as an extension has been
> rejected in the past.)

Yeah, that's kinda what I expected. There's just under 1700 insert and
update statements but only 1200 selects. Neither option sounds good at
this point.

Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com http://www.pop4.net
56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================

On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> Vince Vielhaber writes:
>
> > For example:
> >
> > insert into foo(foo.a) values(1);
> >
> > fails because the table name is used. Update statements also include the
> > table name. Both fail. Does anyone know of a workaround?
>
> Completely loudly to whomever wrote that SQL. It's completely
> non-standard.
>
> (The implication I'm trying to make is that there's no way to make
> PostgreSQL accept that statement. Adding this as an extension has been
> rejected in the past.)

I'm now wondering why it was rejected. I couldn't try this last nite
so I just tried it now. Here's with Sybase 11.0.3.3 :

1> create table foo(a int)
2> go
1> insert into foo(a) values(1)
2> go
(1 row affected)
1> insert into foo(foo.a) values(2)
2> go
(1 row affected)
1>

And I suspect more than just mysql and sybase accept either syntax.
Right now I'm modifying postnuke but that's only a short term solution,
and I wouldn't want to add it to PostgreSQL either 'cuze if it remains
rejected that would hamper upgrades. ROCK --> ME <-- HARD PLACE :)
There are really no other decent CMSs available that support PostgreSQL.

Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com http://www.pop4.net
56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================

Why not send in your changes to PostNuke along with the appropriate
section from the SQL specs?

Surely they'll apply a reasoned patch which improves conformance to
the SQL standard and doesn't break anything in the process. I'd
suspect both SyBase, and MySQL can also take insert into foo (a) as
well.
--
Rod Taylor

This message represents the official view of the voices in my head

----- Original Message -----
From: "Vince Vielhaber" <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>
To: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 8:29 AM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] insert statements

> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> > Vince Vielhaber writes:
> >
> > > For example:
> > >
> > > insert into foo(foo.a) values(1);
> > >
> > > fails because the table name is used. Update statements also
include the
> > > table name. Both fail. Does anyone know of a workaround?
> >
> > Completely loudly to whomever wrote that SQL. It's completely
> > non-standard.
> >
> > (The implication I'm trying to make is that there's no way to make
> > PostgreSQL accept that statement. Adding this as an extension has
been
> > rejected in the past.)
>
> I'm now wondering why it was rejected. I couldn't try this last
nite
> so I just tried it now. Here's with Sybase 11.0.3.3 :
>
> 1> create table foo(a int)
> 2> go
> 1> insert into foo(a) values(1)
> 2> go
> (1 row affected)
> 1> insert into foo(foo.a) values(2)
> 2> go
> (1 row affected)
> 1>
>
> And I suspect more than just mysql and sybase accept either syntax.
> Right now I'm modifying postnuke but that's only a short term
solution,
> and I wouldn't want to add it to PostgreSQL either 'cuze if it
remains
> rejected that would hamper upgrades. ROCK --> ME <-- HARD PLACE
:)
> There are really no other decent CMSs available that support
PostgreSQL.
>
> Vince.
> --
>
======================================================================
====
> Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com
http://www.pop4.net
> 56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
> Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
> Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
>
======================================================================
====
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of
broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>

On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:

> Why not send in your changes to PostNuke along with the appropriate
> section from the SQL specs?
>
> Surely they'll apply a reasoned patch which improves conformance to
> the SQL standard and doesn't break anything in the process. I'd
> suspect both SyBase, and MySQL can also take insert into foo (a) as
> well.

Look below, I showed both syntaxes with Sybase. Since I don't have a
copy of the SQL specs I can't send them the appropriate section or I
would have already. Care to forward that appropriate section?

> --
> Rod Taylor
>
> This message represents the official view of the voices in my head
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Vince Vielhaber" <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>
> To: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
> Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 8:29 AM
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] insert statements
>
>
> > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >
> > > Vince Vielhaber writes:
> > >
> > > > For example:
> > > >
> > > > insert into foo(foo.a) values(1);
> > > >
> > > > fails because the table name is used. Update statements also
> include the
> > > > table name. Both fail. Does anyone know of a workaround?
> > >
> > > Completely loudly to whomever wrote that SQL. It's completely
> > > non-standard.
> > >
> > > (The implication I'm trying to make is that there's no way to make
> > > PostgreSQL accept that statement. Adding this as an extension has
> been
> > > rejected in the past.)
> >
> > I'm now wondering why it was rejected. I couldn't try this last
> nite
> > so I just tried it now. Here's with Sybase 11.0.3.3 :
> >
> > 1> create table foo(a int)
> > 2> go
> > 1> insert into foo(a) values(1)
> > 2> go
> > (1 row affected)
> > 1> insert into foo(foo.a) values(2)
> > 2> go
> > (1 row affected)
> > 1>
> >
> > And I suspect more than just mysql and sybase accept either syntax.
> > Right now I'm modifying postnuke but that's only a short term
> solution,
> > and I wouldn't want to add it to PostgreSQL either 'cuze if it
> remains
> > rejected that would hamper upgrades. ROCK --> ME <-- HARD PLACE
> :)
> > There are really no other decent CMSs available that support
> PostgreSQL.
> >
> > Vince.
> > --
> >
> ======================================================================
> ====
> > Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com
> http://www.pop4.net
> > 56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
> > Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
> > Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
> >
> ======================================================================
> ====
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
> >
> > http://archives.postgresql.org
> >
>
>

Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com http://www.pop4.net
56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================

As snipped from:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2000-10/msg00030.php (All
my stuff is in paper form)
What's your definition of "other dbs"? The above statement is quite
clearly in violation of the SQL92 and SQL99 specifications:

<insert statement> ::=
INSERT INTO <table name>
<insert columns and source>

<insert columns and source> ::=
[ <left paren> <insert column list> <right paren> ]
<query expression>
| DEFAULT VALUES

<insert column list> ::= <column name list>

<column name list> ::=
<column name> [ { <comma> <column name> }... ]

<column name> ::= <identifier>

I'm not particularly excited about supporting non-SQL variant syntaxes
that add no functionality.

regards, tom lane
--
Rod Taylor

This message represents the official view of the voices in my head

----- Original Message -----
From: "Vince Vielhaber" <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>
To: "Rod Taylor" <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca>
Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>;
<pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 9:08 AM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] insert statements

> On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
>
> > Why not send in your changes to PostNuke along with the
appropriate
> > section from the SQL specs?
> >
> > Surely they'll apply a reasoned patch which improves conformance
to
> > the SQL standard and doesn't break anything in the process. I'd
> > suspect both SyBase, and MySQL can also take insert into foo (a)
as
> > well.
>
> Look below, I showed both syntaxes with Sybase. Since I don't have
a
> copy of the SQL specs I can't send them the appropriate section or I
> would have already. Care to forward that appropriate section?
>
>
> > --
> > Rod Taylor
> >
> > This message represents the official view of the voices in my head
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Vince Vielhaber" <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>
> > To: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
> > Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
> > Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 8:29 AM
> > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] insert statements
> >
> >
> > > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > >
> > > > Vince Vielhaber writes:
> > > >
> > > > > For example:
> > > > >
> > > > > insert into foo(foo.a) values(1);
> > > > >
> > > > > fails because the table name is used. Update statements
also
> > include the
> > > > > table name. Both fail. Does anyone know of a workaround?
> > > >
> > > > Completely loudly to whomever wrote that SQL. It's completely
> > > > non-standard.
> > > >
> > > > (The implication I'm trying to make is that there's no way to
make
> > > > PostgreSQL accept that statement. Adding this as an extension
has
> > been
> > > > rejected in the past.)
> > >
> > > I'm now wondering why it was rejected. I couldn't try this last
> > nite
> > > so I just tried it now. Here's with Sybase 11.0.3.3 :
> > >
> > > 1> create table foo(a int)
> > > 2> go
> > > 1> insert into foo(a) values(1)
> > > 2> go
> > > (1 row affected)
> > > 1> insert into foo(foo.a) values(2)
> > > 2> go
> > > (1 row affected)
> > > 1>
> > >
> > > And I suspect more than just mysql and sybase accept either
syntax.
> > > Right now I'm modifying postnuke but that's only a short term
> > solution,
> > > and I wouldn't want to add it to PostgreSQL either 'cuze if it
> > remains
> > > rejected that would hamper upgrades. ROCK --> ME <-- HARD PLACE
> > :)
> > > There are really no other decent CMSs available that support
> > PostgreSQL.
> > >
> > > Vince.
> > > --
> > >
> >
======================================================================
> > ====
> > > Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com
> > http://www.pop4.net
> > > 56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
> > > Online Campground Directory
http://www.camping-usa.com
> > > Online Giftshop Superstore
http://www.cloudninegifts.com
> > >
> >
======================================================================
> > ====
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------(end of
> > broadcast)---------------------------
> > > TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
> > >
> > > http://archives.postgresql.org
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> Vince.
> --
>
======================================================================
====
> Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com
http://www.pop4.net
> 56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
> Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
> Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
>
======================================================================
====
>
>
>
>

On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:

> As snipped from:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2000-10/msg00030.php (All
> my stuff is in paper form)
> What's your definition of "other dbs"? The above statement is quite
> clearly in violation of the SQL92 and SQL99 specifications:

And nowhere does it say that <column name> cannot be qualified with
the table name in front of it. Looking at the entire message noted
above the list of other dbs that support it is now Oracle, Sybase,
MS-SQL and mysql. If "other dbs" ends up the equivilent of "everything
but PostgreSQL" then which one is non-standard?

>
> <insert statement> ::=
> INSERT INTO <table name>
> <insert columns and source>
>
> <insert columns and source> ::=
> [ <left paren> <insert column list> <right paren> ]
> <query expression>
> | DEFAULT VALUES
>
> <insert column list> ::= <column name list>
>
> <column name list> ::=
> <column name> [ { <comma> <column name> }... ]
>
> <column name> ::= <identifier>
>
> I'm not particularly excited about supporting non-SQL variant syntaxes
> that add no functionality.
>
> regards, tom lane
> --
> Rod Taylor
>
> This message represents the official view of the voices in my head
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Vince Vielhaber" <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>
> To: "Rod Taylor" <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca>
> Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>;
> <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 9:08 AM
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] insert statements
>
>
> > On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
> >
> > > Why not send in your changes to PostNuke along with the
> appropriate
> > > section from the SQL specs?
> > >
> > > Surely they'll apply a reasoned patch which improves conformance
> to
> > > the SQL standard and doesn't break anything in the process. I'd
> > > suspect both SyBase, and MySQL can also take insert into foo (a)
> as
> > > well.
> >
> > Look below, I showed both syntaxes with Sybase. Since I don't have
> a
> > copy of the SQL specs I can't send them the appropriate section or I
> > would have already. Care to forward that appropriate section?
> >
> >
> > > --
> > > Rod Taylor
> > >
> > > This message represents the official view of the voices in my head
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Vince Vielhaber" <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>
> > > To: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
> > > Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
> > > Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 8:29 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] insert statements
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Vince Vielhaber writes:
> > > > >
> > > > > > For example:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > insert into foo(foo.a) values(1);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > fails because the table name is used. Update statements
> also
> > > include the
> > > > > > table name. Both fail. Does anyone know of a workaround?
> > > > >
> > > > > Completely loudly to whomever wrote that SQL. It's completely
> > > > > non-standard.
> > > > >
> > > > > (The implication I'm trying to make is that there's no way to
> make
> > > > > PostgreSQL accept that statement. Adding this as an extension
> has
> > > been
> > > > > rejected in the past.)
> > > >
> > > > I'm now wondering why it was rejected. I couldn't try this last
> > > nite
> > > > so I just tried it now. Here's with Sybase 11.0.3.3 :
> > > >
> > > > 1> create table foo(a int)
> > > > 2> go
> > > > 1> insert into foo(a) values(1)
> > > > 2> go
> > > > (1 row affected)
> > > > 1> insert into foo(foo.a) values(2)
> > > > 2> go
> > > > (1 row affected)
> > > > 1>
> > > >
> > > > And I suspect more than just mysql and sybase accept either
> syntax.
> > > > Right now I'm modifying postnuke but that's only a short term
> > > solution,
> > > > and I wouldn't want to add it to PostgreSQL either 'cuze if it
> > > remains
> > > > rejected that would hamper upgrades. ROCK --> ME <-- HARD PLACE
> > > :)
> > > > There are really no other decent CMSs available that support
> > > PostgreSQL.
> > > >
> > > > Vince.
> > > > --
> > > >
> > >
> ======================================================================
> > > ====
> > > > Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com
> > > http://www.pop4.net
> > > > 56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
> > > > Online Campground Directory
> http://www.camping-usa.com
> > > > Online Giftshop Superstore
> http://www.cloudninegifts.com
> > > >
> > >
> ======================================================================
> > > ====
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------(end of
> > > broadcast)---------------------------
> > > > TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
> > > >
> > > > http://archives.postgresql.org
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Vince.
> > --
> >
> ======================================================================
> ====
> > Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com
> http://www.pop4.net
> > 56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
> > Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
> > Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
> >
> ======================================================================
> ====
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com http://www.pop4.net
56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================

Out of curiosity, does SyBase allow you to qualify it with
schema.table.column?
--
Rod Taylor

This message represents the official view of the voices in my head

----- Original Message -----
From: "Vince Vielhaber" <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>
To: "Rod Taylor" <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca>
Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>;
<pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 9:39 AM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] insert statements

> On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
>
> > As snipped from:
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2000-10/msg00030.php
(All
> > my stuff is in paper form)
> > What's your definition of "other dbs"? The above statement is
quite
> > clearly in violation of the SQL92 and SQL99 specifications:
>
> And nowhere does it say that <column name> cannot be qualified with
> the table name in front of it. Looking at the entire message noted
> above the list of other dbs that support it is now Oracle, Sybase,
> MS-SQL and mysql. If "other dbs" ends up the equivilent of
"everything
> but PostgreSQL" then which one is non-standard?
>
>
>
>
> >
> > <insert statement> ::=
> > INSERT INTO <table name>
> > <insert columns and source>
> >
> > <insert columns and source> ::=
> > [ <left paren> <insert column list> <right
paren> ]
> > <query expression>
> > | DEFAULT VALUES
> >
> > <insert column list> ::= <column name list>
> >
> > <column name list> ::=
> > <column name> [ { <comma> <column name> }... ]
> >
> > <column name> ::= <identifier>
> >
> > I'm not particularly excited about supporting non-SQL variant
syntaxes
> > that add no functionality.
> >
> > regards, tom lane
> > --
> > Rod Taylor
> >
> > This message represents the official view of the voices in my head
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Vince Vielhaber" <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>
> > To: "Rod Taylor" <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca>
> > Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>;
> > <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
> > Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 9:08 AM
> > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] insert statements
> >
> >
> > > On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > >
> > > > Why not send in your changes to PostNuke along with the
> > appropriate
> > > > section from the SQL specs?
> > > >
> > > > Surely they'll apply a reasoned patch which improves
conformance
> > to
> > > > the SQL standard and doesn't break anything in the process.
I'd
> > > > suspect both SyBase, and MySQL can also take insert into foo
(a)
> > as
> > > > well.
> > >
> > > Look below, I showed both syntaxes with Sybase. Since I don't
have
> > a
> > > copy of the SQL specs I can't send them the appropriate section
or I
> > > would have already. Care to forward that appropriate section?
> > >
> > >
> > > > --
> > > > Rod Taylor
> > > >
> > > > This message represents the official view of the voices in my
head
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Vince Vielhaber" <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>
> > > > To: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
> > > > Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
> > > > Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 8:29 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] insert statements
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Vince Vielhaber writes:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > For example:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > insert into foo(foo.a) values(1);
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > fails because the table name is used. Update statements
> > also
> > > > include the
> > > > > > > table name. Both fail. Does anyone know of a
workaround?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Completely loudly to whomever wrote that SQL. It's
completely
> > > > > > non-standard.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (The implication I'm trying to make is that there's no way
to
> > make
> > > > > > PostgreSQL accept that statement. Adding this as an
extension
> > has
> > > > been
> > > > > > rejected in the past.)
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm now wondering why it was rejected. I couldn't try this
last
> > > > nite
> > > > > so I just tried it now. Here's with Sybase 11.0.3.3 :
> > > > >
> > > > > 1> create table foo(a int)
> > > > > 2> go
> > > > > 1> insert into foo(a) values(1)
> > > > > 2> go
> > > > > (1 row affected)
> > > > > 1> insert into foo(foo.a) values(2)
> > > > > 2> go
> > > > > (1 row affected)
> > > > > 1>
> > > > >
> > > > > And I suspect more than just mysql and sybase accept either
> > syntax.
> > > > > Right now I'm modifying postnuke but that's only a short
term
> > > > solution,
> > > > > and I wouldn't want to add it to PostgreSQL either 'cuze if
it
> > > > remains
> > > > > rejected that would hamper upgrades. ROCK --> ME <-- HARD
PLACE
> > > > :)
> > > > > There are really no other decent CMSs available that support
> > > > PostgreSQL.
> > > > >
> > > > > Vince.
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
======================================================================
> > > > ====
> > > > > Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com
> > > > http://www.pop4.net
> > > > > 56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4
Networking
> > > > > Online Campground Directory
> > http://www.camping-usa.com
> > > > > Online Giftshop Superstore
> > http://www.cloudninegifts.com
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
======================================================================
> > > > ====
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------(end of
> > > > broadcast)---------------------------
> > > > > TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
> > > > >
> > > > > http://archives.postgresql.org
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Vince.
> > > --
> > >
> >
======================================================================
> > ====
> > > Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com
> > http://www.pop4.net
> > > 56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
> > > Online Campground Directory
http://www.camping-usa.com
> > > Online Giftshop Superstore
http://www.cloudninegifts.com
> > >
> >
======================================================================
> > ====
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> Vince.
> --
>
======================================================================
====
> Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com
http://www.pop4.net
> 56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
> Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
> Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
>
======================================================================
====
>
>
>
>

On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:

> Out of curiosity, does SyBase allow you to qualify it with
> schema.table.column?

Just tried it... Yes.

Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com http://www.pop4.net
56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================

On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Vince Vielhaber wrote:

> On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
>
> > As snipped from:
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2000-10/msg00030.php (All
> > my stuff is in paper form)
> > What's your definition of "other dbs"? The above statement is quite
> > clearly in violation of the SQL92 and SQL99 specifications:
>
> And nowhere does it say that <column name> cannot be qualified with
> the table name in front of it. Looking at the entire message noted

AFAICS periods are not valid in identifiers that are not double
quoted (section 5.2 has the rules on regular identifiers and delimited
ones)

<regular identifier> ::= <identifier body>

<identifier body> ::=
<identifier start> [ { <underscore> | <identifier part> }... ]

<identifier start> ::= !! See the Syntax Rules

<identifier part> ::=
<identifier start>
| <digit>
identifier start is a simple latin letter, a letter in the character
repertoire that's in use, a syllable in the repertoire or an ideograph in
the repertoire.

identifier is defined as either a regular identifier or a delimited one
(ie double quoted). So column name cannot contain periods.

That being said, is this something that's worth adding due to general
usage by other systems?

On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Stephan Szabo wrote:

>
> <identifier start> ::= !! See the Syntax Rules
>
> <identifier part> ::=
> <identifier start>
> | <digit>
> identifier start is a simple latin letter, a letter in the character
> repertoire that's in use, a syllable in the repertoire or an ideograph in
> the repertoire.
>
> identifier is defined as either a regular identifier or a delimited one
> (ie double quoted). So column name cannot contain periods.
>
> That being said, is this something that's worth adding due to general
> usage by other systems?

In an odd way, I guess that's what I'm asking. At what point is it us
that's non-standard?

Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com http://www.pop4.net
56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================

Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com> writes:
>> What's your definition of "other dbs"? The above statement is quite
>> clearly in violation of the SQL92 and SQL99 specifications:

> And nowhere does it say that <column name> cannot be qualified with
> the table name in front of it.

Au contraire, that is EXACTLY what that bit of BNF is saying. If
they'd meant to allow this construction then the BNF would refer to
<qualified name>, not just <identifier>.

> Looking at the entire message noted
> above the list of other dbs that support it is now Oracle, Sybase,
> MS-SQL and mysql. If "other dbs" ends up the equivilent of "everything
> but PostgreSQL" then which one is non-standard?

Out of curiosity, what do these guys do if I try the obvious

insert into foo (bar.col) ...

regards, tom lane

On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Tom Lane wrote:

> Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com> writes:
> >> What's your definition of "other dbs"? The above statement is quite
> >> clearly in violation of the SQL92 and SQL99 specifications:
>
> > And nowhere does it say that <column name> cannot be qualified with
> > the table name in front of it.
>
> Au contraire, that is EXACTLY what that bit of BNF is saying. If
> they'd meant to allow this construction then the BNF would refer to
> <qualified name>, not just <identifier>.
>
> > Looking at the entire message noted
> > above the list of other dbs that support it is now Oracle, Sybase,
> > MS-SQL and mysql. If "other dbs" ends up the equivilent of "everything
> > but PostgreSQL" then which one is non-standard?
>
> Out of curiosity, what do these guys do if I try the obvious
>
> insert into foo (bar.col) ...

Looks like Sybase ignores the bar:

1> create table foo(a int)
2> go
1> insert into foo(bar.a) values(1)
2> go
(1 row affected)
1> select * from foo
2> go
a
-----------
1

(1 row affected)
1>

Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com http://www.pop4.net
56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================

Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com> writes:
> There are really no other decent CMSs available that support
> PostgreSQL.

bricolage.thepirtgroup.com/

Mike.

> > > Looking at the entire message noted
> > > above the list of other dbs that support it is now Oracle, Sybase,
> > > MS-SQL and mysql. If "other dbs" ends up the equivilent of "everything
> > > but PostgreSQL" then which one is non-standard?

The one(s) that intentionally violate or gratuitously extend published
language standards? ;)

> Looks like Sybase ignores the bar:

:)

So would you like to write the specification for this "standard
behavior"? We'll submit it for SQL200x :)

- Thomas

Sorry for the previous sarcastic response.

But I *really* don't see the benefit of that <table>(<table>.<col>)
syntax. Especially when it cannot (?? we need a counterexample) lead to
any additional interesting beneficial behavior.

- Thomas

Vince Vielhaber wrote:
>
> Looks like Sybase ignores the bar:
>
> 1> create table foo(a int)
> 2> go
> 1> insert into foo(bar.a) values(1)
> 2> go
> (1 row affected)
> 1> select * from foo
> 2> go
> a
> -----------
> 1
>
> (1 row affected)
> 1>
>

This looks like a parser error to me. It probably only takes the
last bit of the name and ignores all the qualifiers...

--
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat Canada Ltd. E-Mail: fnasser(at)redhat(dot)com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9

Vince Vielhaber wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
>
> > Out of curiosity, does SyBase allow you to qualify it with
> > schema.table.column?
>
> Just tried it... Yes.
>

What if you give it a bogus schema name? Does it error out or just
ignore it?

--
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat Canada Ltd. E-Mail: fnasser(at)redhat(dot)com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9

On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Fernando Nasser wrote:

> Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
> >
> > > Out of curiosity, does SyBase allow you to qualify it with
> > > schema.table.column?
> >
> > Just tried it... Yes.
> >
>
> What if you give it a bogus schema name? Does it error out or just
> ignore it?

If I get a few mins before I leave I'll try it, but I would guess
that it ignores it because when I tried INSERT INTO foo(bar.a), bar
didn't exist and Sybase still accepted it.

Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com http://www.pop4.net
56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================