Horton

Re: Proposal: QUALIFY clause

Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>

View thread
From: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>, Matheus Alcantara <matheusssilv97@gmail.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
Date: 2025-07-23T08:12:39Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 2025-Jul-22, Andrew Dunstan wrote:

> If we were making up our own syntax this would be a sensible thing to
> debate. If we're talking about implementing something we expect to be in the
> standard, I think we will have to live with what the standards committee
> decides, regardless of our preference. We've almost certainly been preempted
> here by other RDBMSs using QUALIFY, heedless of English grammar.

The Romans, the Vikings, the Normans, all have influenced the English
language.  Why not SQL?

-- 
Álvaro Herrera        Breisgau, Deutschland  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
“Cuando no hay humildad las personas se degradan” (A. Christie)