Re: Sequence Access Method WIP
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Sequence Access Method WIP |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoYy92CO1tcpDG-hd=pxPBcyqcyetFqeW=2Cu2H8st0VKA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Sequence Access Method WIP (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Sequence Access Method WIP
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru> writes: >> On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> >> wrote: >>> I'm thinking we'd do CREATE ACCESS METHOD foobar TYPE INDEX or something >>> like that. > >> I would prefer "CREATE {INDEX | SEQUENCE | ... } ACCESS METHOD name HANDLER >> handler;", but I don't insist. > > I think that Alvaro's idea is less likely to risk future grammar > conflicts. We've had enough headaches from CREATE [ UNIQUE ] INDEX > [ CONCURRENTLY ] to make me really wary of variables in the statement-name > part of the syntax. Strong +1. If we put the type of access method immediately after CREATE, I'm almost positive we'll regret it for exactly that reason. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: