| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SET WITHOUT CLUSTER patch |
| Date: | 2004-05-02 12:26:16 |
| Message-ID: | 200405021226.i42CQGf06547@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> >>Now, I have to change that relation_expr to qualified_name. However,
> >>this causes shift/reduce errors. (Due to ALTER TABLE relation_expr SET
> >>WITHOUT OIDS.)
> >
> > Well, seems like what you have to do is leave it as relation_expr
> > as far as bison is concerned, but test in the C-code action and error
> > out if "*" was specified. (Accepting ONLY seems alright to me.)
>
> Actually, it occurs to me that the SET WITHOUT CLUSTER form CAN recurse.
> Should I make it do that, even though the CLUSTER ON form cannot?
I just thought about this. CLUSTER is more of a storage-level
specification, rather than a logical one. Seems it is OK that WITOUTH
CLUSTER not recurse into inherited tables, especially since the CLUSTER
command does not.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2004-05-02 13:08:10 | Re: Fixed directory locations in installs |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-05-02 12:07:53 | Re: Timezone database questions |