| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: TABLE command |
| Date: | 2008-11-20 22:26:23 |
| Message-ID: | 15178.1227219983@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
petere(at)postgresql(dot)org (Peter Eisentraut) writes:
> Log Message:
> -----------
> TABLE command
If this got re-posted for review I missed it :-(. I disagree with using
qualified_name here --- I think it would be better to use relation_expr
so that people would have the ability to specify inheritance behavior.
If you want to point to the spec and say that that syntax isn't in the
spec, that's true, but then you need to justify the inhOpt setting
you're forcing people to use. It's not entirely clear what behavior the
spec intends, but I'm pretty sure INH_DEFAULT isn't it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-11-21 00:43:16 | Re: pgsql: Fix some issues that prevent this file to be processed by |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2008-11-20 21:27:13 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Silence compiler warning about ignored return value. |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-11-20 23:44:22 | Re: Cool hack with recursive queries |
| Previous Message | Kenneth Marshall | 2008-11-20 22:06:56 | Re: WIP parallel restore patch |