Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 13:05:30 -0400
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>,
	PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: New EXPLAIN option: ALL
Message-ID: <20190515170529.GA18938@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20190515162617.bu2fgroufcxaup53@alap3.anarazel.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

On 2019-May-15, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2019-05-15 11:05:31 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> > After eyeballing the giant patch set you sent[1], I think EXEC is a
> > horrible keyword to use -- IMO it should either be the complete word
> > EXECUTE, or we should pick some other word.  I realize that we do not
> > want to have different sets of keywords when using the legacy syntax (no
> > parens) vs.  new-style (with parens), but maybe we should just not
> > support the EXECUTE keyword in the legacy syntax; there's already a
> > number of options we don't support in the legacy syntax (BUFFERS,
> > TIMING), so this isn't much of a stretch.
> 
> That seems too confusing.

Ok.  Are you voting for using EXEC as a keyword to replace ANALYZE?

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services