Re: Time to remove unparenthesized syntax for VACUUM?

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Time to remove unparenthesized syntax for VACUUM?
Date: 2022-07-01 22:19:28
Message-ID: 20220701221928.flg6rbcilub7czij@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2022-07-01 15:13:16 -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2022 at 03:05:55PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2022-07-01 14:56:42 -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> >> The unparenthesized syntax for VACUUM has been marked deprecated since v9.1
> >> (ad44d50). Should it be removed in v16? If not, should we start emitting
> >> WARNINGs when it is used?
> >
> > What would we gain? ISTM that the number of scripts and typing habits that'd
> > be broken would vastly exceed the benefit.
>
> Beyond removing a few lines from gram.y and vacuum.sgml, probably not much.
> If it isn't going to be removed, IMO we should consider removing the
> deprecation notice in the docs.

Still serves as an explanation as to why newer options haven't been / won't be
added in an unparenthesized manner. And maybe there one day will be reason to
remove them, e.g. grammar ambiguities.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2022-07-01 22:23:26 Re: Time to remove unparenthesized syntax for VACUUM?
Previous Message Andres Freund 2022-07-01 22:17:22 Re: EINTR in ftruncate()