Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > I have applied this minor patch. I don't want to document the ability
> > to use equals in this case because some day we may remove it. The
> > equals doesn't fit with any of our other WITH clauses.
>
> One could argue at least as plausibly that we should allow optional '='
> in all the other WITH clauses. (That thought was why I renamed the
> nonterminal to not refer to createdb.)
Well we have on TODO:
* Make equals sign optional in CREATE DATABASE WITH param = 'val'
> I'm also quite unimpressed with the notion of trying to suppress
> knowledge of a syntax that is in active use by pg_dump, and perhaps
> other tools too.
Well, my assumption is that we don't want to document it because we want
to discourage its use, unless we want to add equals to all the WITH
clauses, which I didn't think we wanted to do.
There are other cases of syntax we don't document because it makes
little sense, and I thought this was one of them.
You have a good point with pg_dump. Can I remove the use of the equals
in there? Seems safe to me. However, it does prevent us from loading
newer pgdumps into older database, which seems like a pain.
Wow, this is tricky. I guess it is not worth fixing this to make it
consistent. I will put back the [=] and remove the comment unless
someone else has a better idea.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
