Re: strange CREATE INDEX tab completion cases

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: strange CREATE INDEX tab completion cases
Date: 2016-01-11 20:03:05
Message-ID: 20160111200305.GA757932@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 12/13/15 9:16 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Please see the attached to address those things (and others) with
> > extra fixes for a couple of comments.
>
> I have ported these changes to the new world order and divided them up
> into more logical changes that are more clearly documented. Please
> check that this matches what you had in mind.

One thing I just noticed is that CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY cannot be
used within CREATE SCHEMA, so perhaps the lines that match the
CONCURRENTLY keyword should use Matches() rather than TailMatches().
Similarly (but perhaps this is not workable) the lines that TailMatch()
but do not Match() should not offer CONCURRENTLY after INDEX.

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2016-01-11 20:10:45 Re: Speedup twophase transactions
Previous Message Edson Richter 2016-01-11 19:59:13 Re: Driver behaves differently with prepareThreshold and timestamp fields when daylights is active (was Re: Re: 9.4-1207 behaves differently with server side prepared statements compared to 9.2-1102)