On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 11:23:43AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from David Fetter's message of jue mar 15 02:28:28 -0300 2012:
> > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 12:06:20PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 10:22 AM, David Fetter <david@fetter.org> wrote:
> > > >> I think that instead of inventing new grammar productions and
> > > >> a new node type for this, you should just reuse the existing
> > > >> productions for LIKE clauses and then reject invalid options
> > > >> during parse analysis.
> > > >
> > > > OK. Should I first merge CREATE FOREIGN TABLE with CREATE
> > > > TABLE and submit that as a separate patch?
> > >
> > > I don't see any reason to do that. I merely meant that you
> > > could reuse TableLikeClause or maybe even TableElement in the
> > > grammer for CreateForeignTableStmt.
> >
> > Next WIP patch attached implementing this via reusing
> > TableLikeClause and refactoring transformTableLikeClause().
> >
> > What say?
>
> Looks much better to me, but the use of strcmp() doesn't look good.
> ISTM that stmtType is mostly used for error messages. I think you
> should add some kind of identifier (such as the original parser
> Node) into the CreateStmtContext so that you can do a IsA() test
> instead -- a bit more invasive as a patch, but much cleaner.
OK
> Also the error messages need more work.
What sort?
The more I look at this, the more I think that CREATE TABLE and CREATE
FOREIGN TABLE should be merged, but that's the subject of a later
patch.
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
