Re: Proposal for updatable views

Tom Lane wrote:

>Worst case is we promote WITH to a fully reserved word.  While I don't
>normally care for doing that, it *is* a reserved word per SQL99, and
>offhand I don't see likely scenarios for someone using "with" as a table
>or column or function name.  (Anyone know of a language in which "with"
>is a noun or verb?)
>
>  
>

If we eventually support a WITH clause for recursive queries I suspect 
we won't have much choice anyway. I could imagine someone using "with" 
as a column name, but I can't see how to avoid hurting those people.

cheers

andrew