From: Gavin Sherry <swm@linuxworld.com.au>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
Subject: Re: Values list-of-targetlists patch for comments (was Re:
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 11:57:48 +1000 (EST)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0608041143430.17044@linuxworld.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200608040321.48560.peter_e@gmx.net>
References: <44B69778.5050104@dunslane.net>
<200608031911.48010.peter_e@gmx.net>
<Pine.LNX.4.58.0608041042551.16622@linuxworld.com.au>
<200608040321.48560.peter_e@gmx.net>
On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Gavin Sherry wrote:
> > What do we want to do about documenting:
> >
> > regression=# values(1);
>
> Out of curiosity, according to what theory should that be allowed?
I asked this too. Tom pointed this out (I'd give the URL if I could find
it on archives):
--
You bet. VALUES is parallel to SELECT in the SQL grammar, so AFAICS
it should be legal anywhere you can write SELECT.
The basic productions in the spec's grammar are respectively
<query specification> ::=
SELECT [ <set quantifier> ] <select list>
<table expression>
and
<table value constructor> ::=
VALUES <row value expression list>
--
which seems to be the case from my reading of the spec.
Gavin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: swm@linuxworld.com.au, peter_e@gmx.net, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, mail@joeconway.com
Subject: Re: Values list-of-targetlists patch for comments (was Re:
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0608041143430.17044@linuxworld.com.au>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox