| From: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling) |
| Date: | 2017-05-02 12:13:29 |
| Message-ID: | CAA-aLv4j8inbsikmMK5__fe_CGUT40zUKEXQrnuz+Qhya-UtsA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2 May 2017 at 12:55, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Petr Jelinek
> <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> DROP SUBSCRIPTION mysub NODROP SLOT;
>
> I'm pretty uninspired by this choice of syntax. Logical replication
> seems to have added a whole bunch of syntax that involves prefixing
> words with "no". In various places, there's NODROP, NOREFRESH, NOCOPY
> DATA, NOCONNECT, and NOPUBLISH. But "NO" is not an English prefix,
> and there's no precedent of which I'm aware for such SQL syntax. In
> most places, we've chosen to name the option and then the user set it
> to "on" or "off". So for example you type EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, TIMING
> OFF) or EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, TIMING FALSE), not EXPLAIN (ANALYZE,
> NOTIMING). I think most of the logical replication stuff could have
> been done this way pretty easily, but for some reason it picked a
> completely different approach.
+1 for not upsetting my OCD.
Thom
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-05-02 12:13:53 | Re: logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling) |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2017-05-02 12:10:49 | Re: vcregress support for single TAP tests |