>>Actually, it occurs to me that the SET WITHOUT CLUSTER form CAN recurse.
>> Should I make it do that, even though the CLUSTER ON form cannot?
>
> I just thought about this. CLUSTER is more of a storage-level
> specification, rather than a logical one. Seems it is OK that WITOUTH
> CLUSTER not recurse into inherited tables, especially since the CLUSTER
> command does not.
The patch I submitted earlier already does do recursion - I don't see
why it shouldn't really. It's better than failing saying that legal
grammar is in fact illegal :)
Chris