Re: CREATE TABLE fails

David,

On Sun, Mar 8, 2026 at 5:04 PM David G. Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> On Sunday, March 8, 2026, Igor Korot <ikorot01(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> David,
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 8, 2026 at 6:49 PM David G. Johnston
>> <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sunday, March 8, 2026, Igor Korot <ikorot01(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> So the "WITH " clause is definitely available for indexes.
>> >
>> >
>> > Yeah, given you aren’t getting a syntax error all this advice to change
>> the syntax is wrong. Though assuming you meant to apply it to the table
>> was at least reasonable given the lack of confirmed intent statement for
>> what the command should be doing.
>>
>> Thanks.
>> It is a little confusing how it is written in the docs.
>>
>> But I'm not sure how to explain it better. ;-)
>>
>>
> Yeah, using the same term for two separate things isn’t ideal. Using
> table_storage_parameters and index_storage_parameters separately, and
> directly pointing the later to the create index page, would probably be
> better than an overlookable single sentence in the big storage parameters
> paragraph.
>

I am not sure. But looking at the docs I point to it’s confusing.

It doesn’t say that they are documented in CREATE INDEX.

Maybe just add something like:

“Those storage parameters are for table only. If you need ones for index -
check CREATE INDEX page.”

Maybe put that where the WITH clause is explained.

This emphasizes the difference between them.

What do you think?

Thank you.

> David J.
>
>