From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> |
Cc: | PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Tab completion for ALTER ... SET SCHEMA |
Date: | 2010-12-18 02:45:52 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTi=_nXRkftQWXbc_-YAkpKL6uF1_1=hPwAikM5m9@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 9:30 PM, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 21:20 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> wrote:
>> > What it does is gets rid of the incorrect completion which comes from
>> > the completion rule for "SET foo TO bar" by adding the correct
>> > completion for "SET SCHEMA" higher up in the completion function.
>> >
>> > So instead of an incorrect completion we get the correct one.
>>
>> But that's not necessarily wrong, if "foo" happens to be the name of a GUC.
>
> Agreed, which is why I made the new rule only match
>
> ALTER x x SET SCHEMA
>
> while the rest will fall down and match
>
> SET
>
> . So I should be safe since SCHEMA is a reserved words. When I think of
> it I may even have be unnecessary to require the ALTER verb.
Hmm. Using 9.1devel, if I type ALTER TABLE foo SET SCHEMA <tab>, I
get a list of schemas even without this patch.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andreas Karlsson | 2010-12-18 02:47:46 | Re: Tab completion for ALTER ... SET SCHEMA |
Previous Message | Andreas Karlsson | 2010-12-18 02:30:11 | Re: Tab completion for ALTER ... SET SCHEMA |