Re: WIP: extensible enums

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP: extensible enums
Date: 2010-08-23 19:20:39
Message-ID: 10301.1282591239@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> I really don't see the value in making a command substantially less
> intuitive in order to avoid a single keyword, unless it affects areas of
> Postgres outside of this particular command.

It's the three variants to do two things that I find unintuitive.

As I mentioned a minute ago, dropping the "abbreviated" syntax and
just having BEFORE and AFTER would be a good way of achieving
symmetry if you find that important.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2010-08-23 19:24:21 Re: Return of the Solaris vacuum polling problem -- anyone remember this?
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2010-08-23 19:20:15 Re: WIP: extensible enums