| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: COPY (... tab completion |
| Date: | 2016-01-19 14:38:42 |
| Message-ID: | 20429.1453214322@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> This patch makes me wonder: are we going to nuke the grammar "COPY [
> BINARY ] table_name" at some point? This was used up to 7.3.
I'm not particularly in a hurry to remove obsolete syntaxes, as long as
they're not blocking forward progress in some way. However, it seems
to me that it would certainly make sense to remove tab-completion support
for long-deprecated syntax.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dilip Kumar | 2016-01-19 15:00:17 | Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics |
| Previous Message | Thom Brown | 2016-01-19 14:34:54 | Re: Patch: Implement failover on libpq connect level. |