Re: Proposal : REINDEX xxx VERBOSE
От | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Proposal : REINDEX xxx VERBOSE |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20150205.100634.135050917.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Proposal : REINDEX xxx VERBOSE (Sawada Masahiko <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Proposal : REINDEX xxx VERBOSE
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hello, > As per discussion, it seems to good with > REINDEX { INDEX | TABLE | etc } name [ ( option [, option ...] ) ] > or > REINDEX { INDEX | TABLE | etc } [ (option [, optoin ...] ) ] name > i.g., the options of reindex(VERBOSE and FORCE) are put at before or > after object name. > > Because other maintenance command put option at before object name, I > think the latter is better. The phrase "{INDEX | TABLE |..} name" seems to me indivisible as target specification. IMHO, the options for VACUUM and so is placed *just after* command name, not *before* the target. If this is right, the syntax would be like this. REINDEX [ (option [, option ...] ) ] {INDEX | TABLE | etc } name What do you think about this? regares, -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: