Re: Proposal : REINDEX xxx VERBOSE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Proposal : REINDEX xxx VERBOSE
Date
Msg-id 2030.1423004912@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Proposal : REINDEX xxx VERBOSE  (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>)
Responses Re: Proposal : REINDEX xxx VERBOSE
List pgsql-hackers
Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com> writes:
> On 2/3/15 9:20 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, the object type is not an optional part of the command.  It's
>> *necessary*.  I was thinking more like
>> REINDEX { INDEX | TABLE | etc } name [ ( option [, option ...] ) ]

> VACUUM puts the options before the table name, so ISTM it'd be best to 
> keep that with REINDEX. Either REINDEX (options) {INDEX | ...} or 
> REINDEX {INDEX | ...} (options).

Well, I really really don't like the first of those.  IMO the command name
is "REINDEX INDEX" etc, so sticking something in the middle of that is
bogus.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Process 'die' interrupts while reading/writing from the client s
Next
From: Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal : REINDEX xxx VERBOSE