Re: COPY syntax

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> Well, I am the first to agree that the current syntax is not well
> designed, but I must admit that I don't quite see what benefit simply
> adding "TABLE" would have.

I think the idea was that "COPY TABLE ..." could have a new clean syntax
without the warts of the current syntax.  TABLE wouldn't be a noise word,
but a trigger for a different syntax for what follows.

However, COPY's feature set is inherently pretty wart-y.  Even if we had
a green field to design syntax in, where exactly is the improvement
going to come, assuming that functionality has to stay the same?
        regards, tom lane