Re: Syntax question

From: Michael Brusser <michael(at)synchronicity(dot)com>
To: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Syntax question
Date: 2004-05-24 14:02:24
Message-ID: DEEIJKLFNJGBEMBLBAHCGEAOELAA.michael@synchronicity.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

For what it's worth, I like the second form better.
Mike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org]On Behalf Of Christopher
> Kings-Lynne
> Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2004 6:08 AM
> To: PostgreSQL-development
> Subject: [HACKERS] Syntax question
>
>
> Here are the two syntaxes we can use for turning off clustering:
>
> 1) ALTER TABLE / SET WITHOUT CLUSTER
>
> This will turn off clusting on any index on the table that has it
> enabled. It won't recurse so as to match the CLUSTER ON syntax.
> However, this form makes the non-standardy SET WITHOUT form more
> emphasised...
>
> 2) ALTER TABLE / DROP CLUSTER ON idx
>
> I like this form, however to make it work, we need to bump CLUSTER to
> being a reserved keyword. This form looks more like SQL standard, and
> is related to the CLUSTER ON form.
>
> Which one do we want?
>
> Chris
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
> joining column's datatypes do not match
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ned Lilly 2004-05-24 14:08:49 MySQL Lays Path for SAP Integration
Previous Message Jan Wieck 2004-05-24 13:55:04 Re: Slony-I questions