On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 04:52:46PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 01:34:03PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 7:29 PM, Peter Eisentraut
> > > <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > > > On 1/3/17 11:52 PM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> > > >> We will need to make CURRENT_DATABASE a reserved keyword. But I like
> > > >> this idea more than COMMENT ON CURRENT DATABASE.
> > > >
> > > > We already have the reserved key word CURRENT_CATALOG, which is the
> > > > standard spelling. But I wouldn't be bothered if we made
> > > > CURRENT_DATABASE somewhat reserved as well.
> > >
> > > Maybe I'm just lacking in imagination, but what's the argument against
> > > spelling it CURRENT DATABASE? AFAICS, that doesn't require reserving
> > > anything new at all, and it also looks more SQL-ish to me. SQL
> > > generally tries to emulate English, and I don't normally
> > > speak_hyphenated_words.
> >
> > I assume it is to match our use of CURRENT_USER as having special
> > meaning.
>
> CURRENT_USER is a standards-mandated keyword, but CURRENT_DATABASE is
> not. The closest thing SQL has is CURRENT_CATALOG, which is the string
> that identifies the "current default catalog". This would lead us to
> COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_CATALOG
>
> Do we want that spelling? It looks ugly to me.
Agreed.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
