Обсуждение: Syntax question

Here are the two syntaxes we can use for turning off clustering:

1) ALTER TABLE / SET WITHOUT CLUSTER

This will turn off clusting on any index on the table that has it 
enabled.  It won't recurse so as to match the CLUSTER ON syntax. 
However, this form makes the non-standardy SET WITHOUT form more 
emphasised...

2) ALTER TABLE / DROP CLUSTER ON idx

I like this form, however to make it work, we need to bump CLUSTER to 
being a reserved keyword.  This form looks more like SQL standard, and 
is related to the CLUSTER ON form.

Which one do we want?

Chris

Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
> 2) ALTER TABLE / DROP CLUSTER ON idx

> I like this form, however to make it work, we need to bump CLUSTER to 
> being a reserved keyword.

I do not think this form is enough better than the other to justify
creating a nonstandard fully-reserved word.  I'd go with SET WITHOUT.
        regards, tom lane

For what it's worth, I like the second form better.
Mike


> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of Christopher
> Kings-Lynne
> Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2004 6:08 AM
> To: PostgreSQL-development
> Subject: [HACKERS] Syntax question
>
>
> Here are the two syntaxes we can use for turning off clustering:
>
> 1) ALTER TABLE / SET WITHOUT CLUSTER
>
> This will turn off clusting on any index on the table that has it
> enabled.  It won't recurse so as to match the CLUSTER ON syntax.
> However, this form makes the non-standardy SET WITHOUT form more
> emphasised...
>
> 2) ALTER TABLE / DROP CLUSTER ON idx
>
> I like this form, however to make it work, we need to bump CLUSTER to
> being a reserved keyword.  This form looks more like SQL standard, and
> is related to the CLUSTER ON form.
>
> Which one do we want?
>
> Chris
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
>       joining column's datatypes do not match
>