Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: TABLE command
| От | Peter Eisentraut |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: TABLE command |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 49269A5C.5030706@gmx.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответы |
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: TABLE command
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > petere@postgresql.org (Peter Eisentraut) writes: >> Log Message: >> ----------- >> TABLE command > > If this got re-posted for review I missed it :-(. I disagree with using > qualified_name here --- I think it would be better to use relation_expr > so that people would have the ability to specify inheritance behavior. > If you want to point to the spec and say that that syntax isn't in the > spec, that's true, but then you need to justify the inhOpt setting > you're forcing people to use. It's not entirely clear what behavior the > spec intends, but I'm pretty sure INH_DEFAULT isn't it. relation_expr is fine by me. It just makes the syntax more complicated to explain ... Btw., so we plan to keep the sql_inheritance parameter forever?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: