From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: WITH clause in CREATE STATISTICS
In-reply-to: <20170420212426.ltvgyhnefvhixm6i@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <20170420212426.ltvgyhnefvhixm6i@alvherre.pgsql>
Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
	message dated "Thu, 20 Apr 2017 18:24:26 -0300"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <22268.1492726397.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 18:13:17 -0400
Message-ID: <22269.1492726397@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Simon just pointed out that having the WITH clause appear in the middle
> of the CREATE STATISTICS command looks odd; apparently somebody else
> already complained on list about the same.  Other commands put the WITH
> clause at the end, so perhaps we should do likewise in the new command.

> Here's a patch to implement that.  I verified that if I change
> qualified_name to qualified_name_list, bison does not complain about
> conflicts, so this new syntax should support extension to multiple
> relations without a problem.

Yeah, WITH is fully reserved, so as long as the clause looks like
WITH ( stuff... ) you're pretty much gonna be able to drop it
wherever you want.

> Discuss.

+1 for WITH at the end; the existing syntax looks weird to me too.

			regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers