X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD1709FB2B8
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Tue,  1 Aug 2006 17:41:35 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 39230-04 for
	<pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Tue,  1 Aug 2006 17:41:29 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-
Received: from joeconway.com (joeconway.com [68.15.9.201])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECB519FB20C
	for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>;
	Tue,  1 Aug 2006 17:41:29 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from [206.190.70.130] (account jconway HELO [172.16.1.115])
	by joeconway.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8)
	with ESMTP-TLS id 4137644; Tue, 01 Aug 2006 13:41:28 -0700
Message-ID: <44CFBC78.2020508@joeconway.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2006 13:41:28 -0700
From: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
	rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20060501 Fedora/1.7.13-1.1.fc5
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
CC: "Hackers (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Values list-of-targetlists patch for comments (was Re: [PATCHES]
References: <44B69778.5050104@dunslane.net>
	<50461.84.63.113.55.1152832991.squirrel@pezone.net>
	<ECCAAC0A3182895D3D12B0E8@[172.26.14.247]>
	<44B7ADFC.90205@dunslane.net> <44BC0432.3040509@joeconway.com>
	<44BC661F.80609@joeconway.com> <44BCD06C.3060409@calorieking.com>
	<44BCF1D4.3010807@dunslane.net> <5842.1153246741@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<44BD8854.9060506@calorieking.com> <15212.1153279954@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<44BDB2F5.7080003@joeconway.com> <44BEA710.6060700@joeconway.com>
	<23198.1153367887@sss.pgh.pa.us> <44BF0382.2010501@joeconway.com>
	<23454.1153370214@sss.pgh.pa.us> <44BF122F.1080200@joeconway.com>
	<23927.1153373971@sss.pgh.pa.us> <44C00E1E.1000405@joeconway.com>
	<14047.1153442773@sss.pgh.pa.us> <44C4451A.4010906@joeconway.com>
	<11495.1153757531@sss.pgh.pa.us> <44C4F625.2050304@joeconway.com>
	<12029.1153760969@sss.pgh.pa.us> <44CC0A66.6070903@joeconway.com>
	<16429.1154463351@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <16429.1154463351@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.07 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL,
	SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200608/47
X-Sequence-Number: 87540

Tom Lane wrote:
> What I'm inclined to do for 8.2 is to disallow OLD/NEW references in
> multi-element VALUES clauses; the feature is still tremendously useful
> without that.

Given the timing, this sounds like a reasonable approach. I agree that 
the feature has lots of interesting uses -- I'd hate to see us lose 
that. Disallowing OLD/NEW references doesn't contradict the spec in any 
way AFAIK either.

Joe