Re: [HACKERS] IF (NOT) EXISTS in psql-completion
От | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] IF (NOT) EXISTS in psql-completion |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20170227.133305.68651190.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] IF (NOT) EXISTS in psql-completion (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] IF (NOT) EXISTS in psql-completion
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
At Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:43:39 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote in <CAB7nPqQr7apg8W+p41W1azTjy7LSasSEvWvKePTU4knnxWCZkw@mail.gmail.com> > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes: > >> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >>> BTW ... can anyone explain to me the reason why we offer to complete > >>> CREATE OBJECT with the names of existing objects of that kind? > > > >> Isn't that to facilitate commands appended after CREATE SCHEMA? Say > >> table foo is in schema1, and creating it in schema2 gets easier with > >> tab completion? > > > > Seems like pretty much of a stretch. I've never done anything like > > that, have you? > > Never, but that was the only reason I could think about. I recall > reading something else on -hackers but I cannot put my finger on it, > nor does a lookup at the archives help... Perhaps that's the one I > just mentioned as well. I suppose it is for suggesting what kind of word should come there, or avoiding silence for a tab. Or for symmetry with other types of manipulation, like DROP. Another possibility is creating multiple objects with similar names, say CREATE TABLE employee_x1, CREATE TABLE employee_x2. Just trying to complete existing *schema* is one more another possible objective. regards, -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: