public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
To: Ashutosh Bapat <[email protected]>
Cc: Amit Langote <[email protected]>
Cc: Junwang Zhao <[email protected]>
Cc: Vik Fearing <[email protected]>
Cc: Ajay Pal <[email protected]>
Cc: Imran Zaheer <[email protected]>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: SQL Property Graph Queries (SQL/PGQ)
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2026 11:12:08 +0100
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAExHW5sr+dJPCFw2OqXUfPPqPks8qmsivaAYhRiBdFANcX8RHw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<CAExHW5t8UJgon2VW2HMndESyOfhpk2syDYaBSuw60ig9qXcHAA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAExHW5tYT5zvfLTV51+eF1VsH+CtzAH=8umbp4BHB==8t_zsrQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAExHW5st9eC4S+ZfuSzUjgj_qGupX2vbrVorBNOVoHKEGhGKjA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAExHW5t2mRTsSOsTu_aRX3i=D3t0YdwCCU9-2TYcA9L6hzDLQw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAExHW5v8u7-2H2LqWP3ybhh5GnAVVeCOYuTfkg9pmdnrLwAtNA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAExHW5stjrQwS1gXagy_5xmkAvKg_8QHwV=31vLD1O40y-mQiw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAExHW5tUAB2k3bSjXA0EyqakANyWL0pQTfkSmF4avEc3R5L9rw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAExHW5s_P6uAag38aqfP7U=xE0VYAx_2bCCE1SCF0G0h0Wm3Cw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAExHW5sr+dJPCFw2OqXUfPPqPks8qmsivaAYhRiBdFANcX8RHw@mail.gmail.com>
On 18.12.25 10:15, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> I was aware of ecpg and I vaguely remember we fixed something in ECPG
> to allow : in MATCH statement. Probably following changes in
> psqlscan.l and pgc.l
> -self [,()\[\].;\:\+\-\*\/\%\^\<\>\=]
> +self [,()\[\].;\:\|\+\-\*\/\%\^\<\>\=]
>
> Those changes add | after : (and not the : itself) so maybe they are
> not about supporting : . Do you remember what those are?
These are required to support label disjunctions. If you add one of
those to the ecpg sqlpgq tests you added, like (c IS customer|customer),
then it will fail to compile without this change.
The psql change has perhaps no such impact, but in general, these are
supposed to be kept in sync with the main scan.l.
> In ddl.sgml I noticed a seemingly incomplete sentence
> A property graph is a way to represent database contents, instead of using
> relational structures such as tables.
Maybe it's clearer like this:
"A property graph is a way to represent database contents, as an
alternative to the usual (in SQL) approach of representing database
contents using relational structures such as tables."
> 0002 has extra tests mentioned above. It also removes "TODO: dubious
> error message" from a comment. I don't see anything dubious in the
> error message. I think this patch is safe to be merged into 0001.
Hmm, yeah, this might have been a leftover from a different catalog
structure that resulted in different detail messages from the dependency
infrastructure. I can't see anything wrong with the current output either.
view thread (7+ messages)
reply
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: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: SQL Property Graph Queries (SQL/PGQ)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox