From: Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
To: Matt Mello <alien@spaceship.com>
Cc: jasiek@klaster.net
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: implied FROM
Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 09:33:58 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20030502093219.K65288-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <59964.24.243.219.116.1051883093.squirrel@earth.spaceship.com>
On Fri, 2 May 2003, Matt Mello wrote:
> Tomasz Myrta said:
> > <cut>
> > Some people
> > said, that it is very useful inside update queries. The conclusion was
> > this behaviour should stay as it is.
>
> We should at least have the ability to change a PG setting to say that we DO
> NOT WANT PG to try to second guess us ('set FORDUMMYS = false', or
> whatever). In my mind, this "feature" is a violation of the spirit of SQL.
> I wish I was on this list for the "vote" everyone took on this.
Actually 7.4 should have an GUC option for this (enable_implicit_from),
see recent posts to -patches.
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com, alien@spaceship.com, jasiek@klaster.net
Subject: Re: implied FROM
In-Reply-To: <20030502093219.K65288-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
* 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