Re: [PATCH]Feature improvement for MERGE tab completion - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [PATCH]Feature improvement for MERGE tab completion
Date
Msg-id 20220920155105.y7rb57pb5fpoxmln@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH]Feature improvement for MERGE tab completion  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2022-Sep-18, Fujii Masao wrote:

> The tab-completion code for MERGE was added in the middle of that for LOCK TABLE.
> This would be an oversight of the commit that originally supported tab-completion
> for MERGE. I fixed this issue.

Argh, thanks.

> "MERGE" was tab-completed with just after "EXPLAIN" or "EXPLAIN ANALYZE", etc.
> Since "INTO" always follows "MERGE", it's better to complete with "MERGE INTO"
> there. I replaced "MERGE" with "MERGE INTO" in those tab-completions.

OK, that would be similar to REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW.

The rules starting at line 4111 make me a bit nervous, since nowhere
we're restricting them to operating only on MERGE lines.  I don't think
it's a real problem since USING is not terribly common anyway.  Likewise
for the ones with WHEN [NOT] MATCHED.  I kinda wish we had a way to
search for stuff like "keyword MERGE appears earlier in the command",
but we don't have that.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera               48°01'N 7°57'E  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"I'm always right, but sometimes I'm more right than other times."
                                                  (Linus Torvalds)



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal to use JSON for Postgres Parser format
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Tree-walker callbacks vs -Wdeprecated-non-prototype