You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
PartiQL grammar for join expressions currently allows syntax that is not in SQL:
OUTER JOIN -- OUTER must come with LEFT, RIGHT, or FULL, not by itself;
LEFT OUTER CROSS JOIN , RIGHT CROSS JOIN, and other variations of joinType CROSS JOIN -- in SQL, CROSS JOIN is a thing on its own, without further qualification.
While PartiQL sometimes extends SQL syntax in order to anchor constructs with PartiQL-specific semantics distinct from SQL (for example, SELECT VALUE), this does not appear to be the case here. Also, since this involves only the syntactic tokens from the domain of joins -- just in new combinations -- this is particularly confusing/misleading.
Some of this syntax appears in the specification, while there is lore suggesting that LEFT CROSS JOIN is there to work around grammar ambiguity in the presence on the ON condition clause in a join.
The purpose of this ticket it to experiment with the grammar to understand whether there is indeed an issue with SQL-consistent syntax and explore whether it can be resolved. Upon resolution, this will entail adjustments to the specification as well, but those should be purely narrative.
PartiQL grammar for join expressions currently allows syntax that is not in SQL:
OUTER JOIN
-- OUTER must come with LEFT, RIGHT, or FULL, not by itself;LEFT OUTER CROSS JOIN
,RIGHT CROSS JOIN
, and other variations ofjoinType CROSS JOIN
-- in SQL,CROSS JOIN
is a thing on its own, without further qualification.While PartiQL sometimes extends SQL syntax in order to anchor constructs with PartiQL-specific semantics distinct from SQL (for example,
SELECT VALUE
), this does not appear to be the case here. Also, since this involves only the syntactic tokens from the domain of joins -- just in new combinations -- this is particularly confusing/misleading.Some of this syntax appears in the specification, while there is lore suggesting that
LEFT CROSS JOIN
is there to work around grammar ambiguity in the presence on theON condition
clause in a join.The purpose of this ticket it to experiment with the grammar to understand whether there is indeed an issue with SQL-consistent syntax and explore whether it can be resolved. Upon resolution, this will entail adjustments to the specification as well, but those should be purely narrative.
See also partiql-spec #41.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: