Re: A note about VACUUM syntax

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> maybe it
>> is time to bite the bullet and clean up VACUUM's syntax so that new
>> modifiers can be added without making them reserved words. The first
>> idea that comes to mind is something like

> I'd be OK with putting the options at the end, but I'd rather omit the "WITH"
> and the commas.

I don't think it works without the WITH --- you're right back into the
syntactic ambiguity. The commas could be dispensed with perhaps, but
I was looking forward to the idea that some of the options might take
arguments someday, and commas would reduce the risk of ambiguity for
that. (On the other hand, we've survived without commas in COPY,
so maybe I am worrying too much.)

If you want fewer keystrokes, we could do something with parentheses:

VACUUM (FULL, VERBOSE) tablename;

Or some other idea.

regards, tom lane