Re: create table bug with reserved words?
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Cc: Chris Storah <cstorah@emis-support.demon.co.uk>, pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Date: 2001-02-16T17:11:34Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: > But since the problematic word in your case is not CALL but SELECT, I can > tell you right away with relative certainty that it will not be possible > to change the parser to accept SELECT as an identifier in all contexts > without butchering the grammar beyond reason. You can drop the "without" qualifier ;-) --- it's not possible period. Counterexample: SELECT (SELECT (3)) FROM foo; Is the second SELECT a (rather vacuous) sub-select, or is it a call of a function named SELECT? If you've got a really strong urge to use some keyword as an identifier, that's what double quotes are for. But the SQL syntax does require a lot of keywords to be reserved. I believe that we are actually more permissive in this respect than the SQL spec expects us to be. regards, tom lane