From: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Misleading CREATE TABLE error |
Date: | 2011-12-28 02:00:38 |
Message-ID: | CAA-aLv7zH+Wo-aFerM+yfKvJsRMTQP=eUgBe_1DDwVTxxBXVjg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 27 December 2011 20:16, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> It's not only the error message that's misleading, but the whole code,
> because the entire code for CREATE TABLE ... (LIKE ...) claims to do
> "inheritance" based on an ancient understanding of the SQL standard. I
> know this has confused me many times already, so I decided to clean this
> up and rename all the internal parser structures, split up the
> regression tests for real inheritance and CREATE TABLE LIKE, and adjust
> the error messages. Patch attached.
Thanks for the patch. +1 for changing "parent" to "source" in the
docs. The patch doesn't apply cleanly for me for some reason though.
> Anyway, one question that's perhaps worth discussing
> is whether we should allow and disallow the various INCLUDING options
> depending on the relation type. For example, views don't have indexes,
> so should we disallow INCLUDING INDEXES or just assume they don't have
> any?
I'd personally prefer the latter, primarily because it won't create
another syntax variation with no discernable benefit.
--
Thom
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-12-28 02:54:02 | Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2 |
Previous Message | Steve Crawford | 2011-12-28 01:51:06 | pgstat wait timeout |