Re: Partitioning syntax

On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 2:14 AM, Takahiro Itagaki
<itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>> 5. The use of the term "partition" is not very consistent.  For
>> example, we use CREATE PARTITION to create a partition, but we use
>> DROP TABLE to get rid of it (there is no DROP PARTITION).  I think
>> that the right syntax to use here is ALTER TABLE ... ADD/DROP
>> PARTITION; both Oracle and MySQL do it that way. And meanwhile
>> OCLASS_PARTITION means "the partitioning information associated with
>> the parent table", not "a partition of a parent table".
>
> "ALTER TABLE ... ADD/DROP PARTITION" was discussed many times,
> but I cannot solve syntax confict with "ALTER TABLE ... ADD [COLUMN]".
> Since we can omit COLUMN, parser treats "ADD PARTITION" as adding
> a column named "PARTITION". We need to add PARTITION into the reserved
> keyword list to avoid shift/reduce errors.
>
> Do you have any better idea?

No, I think we're going to need to at least partially reserve that
keyword. However, SQL:2003 and SQL:2008 apparently have it as a
reserved keyword, so I'm hoping we can get away with that. I don't
think it's worth inventing a totally different (and, IMHO, not very
appealing) syntax just to avoid reserving a keyword that is reserved
in the standard.

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/sql-keywords-appendix.html

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company