| From: | Sho Ito <i(dot)sho(dot)0628(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | shihao zhong <zhong950419(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH v1] Fix tab completion for DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY |
| Date: | 2026-10-22 14:27:21 |
| Message-ID: | CAG7L5+6aqgK5U9uGfYLztE38Mh0DBeOVQ3f4TfC+k23sV58=yA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Fujii Masao wrote:
> BTW, since "if" is not a reserved keyword, an index can be named "if".
> What should tab completion offer after "DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY if"
> in that case?
Hi Fujii-san,
You're right. I had the affected `DROP` commands in mind, but hadn't
considered an index named `if`. In that case, `RESTRICT` is a valid
completion, so calling the completion after `IF` incorrect was too broad.
I agree that broader `IF [NOT] EXISTS` support would need more thought,
and don't plan to pursue it for now.
Thanks for the review and for committing v1!
Regards,
Sho
--
=======================================
*Sho Ito (Sean)*
E-mail: i(dot)sho(dot)0628(at)gmail(dot)com
LinkedIn: *https://www.linkedin.com/in/sho-ito-0628/
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/sho-ito-0628/>*
GitHub: https://github.com/sean0628/
=======================================
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2026-10-22 14:30:59 | Re: [DEPARSE] EXPLAIN prints another ModifyTable's RETURNING aliases in a SubPlan |
| Previous Message | Sho Ito | 2026-10-22 14:09:22 | Re: [PATCH] Fix leaked hash scans in pg_listening_channels() |