Excerpts from David Fetter's message of jue mar 15 02:28:28 -0300 2012:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 12:06:20PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 10:22 AM, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> wrote:
> > >> I think that instead of inventing new grammar productions and a new
> > >> node type for this, you should just reuse the existing productions for
> > >> LIKE clauses and then reject invalid options during parse analysis.
> > >
> > > OK. Should I first merge CREATE FOREIGN TABLE with CREATE TABLE and
> > > submit that as a separate patch?
> > I don't see any reason to do that. I merely meant that you could
> > reuse TableLikeClause or maybe even TableElement in the grammer for
> > CreateForeignTableStmt.
> Next WIP patch attached implementing this via reusing TableLikeClause
> and refactoring transformTableLikeClause().
> What say?
Looks much better to me, but the use of strcmp() doesn't look good.
ISTM that stmtType is mostly used for error messages. I think you
should add some kind of identifier (such as the original parser Node)
into the CreateStmtContext so that you can do a IsA() test instead -- a
bit more invasive as a patch, but much cleaner.
Also the error messages need more work.
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2012-03-15 14:34:22|
|Subject: Re: Another review of URI for libpq, v7 submission|
|Previous:||From: Stuart Bishop||Date: 2012-03-15 14:18:36|
|Subject: Re: BUG #6532: pg_upgrade fails on Python stored procedures|