| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SET WITHOUT CLUSTER patch |
| Date: | 2004-03-22 15:39:16 |
| Message-ID: | 897.1079969956@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
>> 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?
Seems like more work than it's really worth ... but if you wanna ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2004-03-22 15:41:52 | Re: pg_autovacuum next steps |
| Previous Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2004-03-22 15:37:42 | Re: pg_autovacuum next steps |