Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Michael Paquier
Тема Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0
Дата
Msg-id 20190119013312.GC3306@paquier.xyz
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0  (Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@2ndquadrant.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0  (Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 07:58:06PM +0100, Vik Fearing wrote:
> My vote is to have homogeneous syntax for all of this, and so put it in
> parentheses, but we should also allow CREATE INDEX and DROP INDEX to use
> parentheses for it, too.

That would be a new thing as these variants don't exist yet, and WITH
is for storage parameters.  In my opinion, the long-term take on doing
such things is that we are then able to reduce the number of reserved
keywords in the grammar.  Even if for the case of CONCURRENTLY we may
see humans on Mars before this actually happens, this does not mean
that we should not do it moving forward for other keywords in the
grammar.
--
Michael

Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Shouldn't current_schema() be at least PARALLEL RESTRICTED?
Следующее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Prepare Transaction support for ON COMMIT DROP temporary tables