Feedback-ID: ia2694551:Fastmail
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2022 17:51:05 +0200
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
Cc: bt22kawamotok <bt22kawamotok@oss.nttdata.com>,
	Shinya Kato <Shinya11.Kato@oss.nttdata.com>,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH]Feature improvement for MERGE tab completion
Message-ID: <20220920155105.y7rb57pb5fpoxmln@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <4522079f-256a-9756-7ece-f74fb702c85d@oss.nttdata.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20220920155105.y7rb57pb5fpoxmln%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk

On 2022-Sep-18, Fujii Masao wrote:

> The tab-completion code for MERGE was added in the middle of that for LOCK TABLE.
> This would be an oversight of the commit that originally supported tab-completion
> for MERGE. I fixed this issue.

Argh, thanks.

> "MERGE" was tab-completed with just after "EXPLAIN" or "EXPLAIN ANALYZE", etc.
> Since "INTO" always follows "MERGE", it's better to complete with "MERGE INTO"
> there. I replaced "MERGE" with "MERGE INTO" in those tab-completions.

OK, that would be similar to REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW.

The rules starting at line 4111 make me a bit nervous, since nowhere
we're restricting them to operating only on MERGE lines.  I don't think
it's a real problem since USING is not terribly common anyway.  Likewise
for the ones with WHEN [NOT] MATCHED.  I kinda wish we had a way to
search for stuff like "keyword MERGE appears earlier in the command",
but we don't have that.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera               48°01'N 7°57'E  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"I'm always right, but sometimes I'm more right than other times."
                                                  (Linus Torvalds)