| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Khee Chin <kheechin(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: reloptions with a "namespace" |
| Date: | 2009-04-03 20:06:47 |
| Message-ID: | 20090403200647.GN23023@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane escribió:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > This patch seems to be the right cure. (Some other users of
> > opt_definition remain; I think it's just CREATE FUNCTION by now).
>
> Surely this will break other things. I find myself wondering why you
> invented ReloptElem at all, instead of adding a field to DefElem.
I had to, precisely because it messes up other uses of DefElem ...
For example, the grammar would allow
CREATE FUNCTION ... WITH something.name = value
which we certainly don't want.
I don't expect to break anything else actually. Keep in mind that those
"opt_definition" were there precisely to carry reloptions for the
affected indexes.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-04-03 20:11:52 | Re: reloptions with a "namespace" |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-04-03 20:01:32 | Re: reloptions with a "namespace" |