Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 05/03/2017 04:42 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > One other point is that as long as we've got reserved keywords introducing
> > each clause, there isn't actually an implementation reason why we couldn't
> > accept the clauses in any order. Not sure I want to document it that way,
> > but it might not be a bad thing if the grammar was forgiving about whether
> > you write the USING or ON part first ...
>
> +1 for allowing arbitrary order of clauses. I would document it with the
> USING clause at the end, and have that be what psql supports and pg_dump
> produces. Since there are no WITH options now we should leave that out
> until it's required.
Ok, sounds good to me. Unless there are objections I'm going to have a
shot at implementing this. Thanks for the discussion.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
