Re: creating index names automatically?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: creating index names automatically?
Date: 2009-12-23 03:24:13
Message-ID: 3625.1261538653@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... AFAICT, the only way
>> we could support this syntax would be to make ON a reserved word.
>> Or at least more reserved than it is now. We used up all the wiggle
>> room we had by making CONCURRENTLY non-reserved.

> And here's Simon talking about making CONCURRENTLY more reserved so that
> people stop creating indexes named "concurrently" ...
> http://database-explorer.blogspot.com/2009/09/create-index-concurrently.html

Hmm. It would actually work if we made CONCURRENTLY reserved instead;
and that would fix Simon's gripe too. That's kind of weird from a
standards-compliance POV, but in terms of the risk of breaking
applications it might be better than reserving ON.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-12-23 03:31:07 Re: creating index names automatically?
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2009-12-23 03:17:31 Re: creating index names automatically?