Re: CLUSTER ALL syntax

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > In looking at the CLUSTER ALL patch I have applied, I am now wondering
> > why the ALL keyword is used.  When we do VACUUM, we don't use ALL. 
> > VACUUM vacuums all tables.  Shouldn't' CLUSTER alone do the same thing. 
> 
> I agree, lose the ALL.

Good.  I can take care of that or someone can submit a patch.

> > And what about REINDEX?  That seems to have a different syntax from the
> > other two.  Seems there should be some consistency.
> 
> We don't have a REINDEX ALL, and I'm not in a hurry to invent one.
> (Especially, I'd not want to see Alvaro spending time on that instead
> of fixing the underlying btree-compaction problem ;-))

My point for REINDEX was a little different.  The man pages shows:
REINDEX { DATABASE | TABLE | INDEX } <replaceable    class="PARAMETER">name</replaceable> [ FORCE ]

where we don't have ALL but we do have DATABASE.  Do we need that
tri-valued secodn field for reindex because you can reindex a table _or_
and index, and hence DATABASE makes sense?  I am just asking.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073