On Fri, 20 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > No, but it is a missing capability many will complain about. I can
> > easily remove it. I saw no one comment when I added it to the patches
> > queue.
>
> I hadn't seen you add it to the patches queue ...
>
> I did see Gavin's submission but did not yet have time to look at the
> details. What does it *do* exactly --- simply allow INDEX as a
> substitute for TABLE in the syntax, or more? I'm not thrilled at the
> idea of adding a lot of duplicate coding for this.
I tried to avoid any duplication. The patch still uses all the ALTER TABLE
code. Its just a grammar modification and some setting of completion tags.
That being said, I felt obliged to provide at patch when I started hearing
noise about ALTER TABLE <index name> being a bit of a hack -- which it is.
Gavin