On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:38:56AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 11:23:43AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > 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.
> How about this one?
Oops, forgot to put the latest docs in.
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Joachim Wieland||Date: 2012-03-23 19:21:33|
|Subject: Re: patch for parallel pg_dump|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2012-03-23 19:05:26|
|Subject: Re: query cache|