On 09/08/2014 06:17 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Vik Fearing (vik.fearing@dalibo.com) wrote:
>> On 09/02/2014 10:17 PM, Marko Tiikkaja wrote:
>>> Yeah, I think I like this better than allowing all of them without the
>>> database name.
>>
>> Why? It's just a noise word!
>
> Eh, because it ends up reindexing system tables too, which is probably
> not what new folks are expecting.
No behavior is changed at all. REINDEX DATABASE dbname; has always hit
the system tables. Since dbname can *only* be the current database,
there's no logic nor benefit in requiring it to be specified.
> Also, it's not required when you say
> 'user tables', so it's similar to your user_tables v1 patch in that
> regard.
The fact that REINDEX USER TABLES; is the only one that doesn't require
the dbname seems very inconsistent and confusing.
>> Yes, I will update the patch.
>
> Still planning to do this..?
>
> Marking this back to waiting-for-author.
Yes, but probably not for this commitfest unfortunately.
--
Vik