On 03/11/2011 02:50 PM, David Christensen wrote:
> On Mar 11, 2011, at 1:40 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
>> <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>> On 11.03.2011 20:59, Robert Haas wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>>>> Add missing keywords to gram.y's unreserved_keywords list.
>>>>>
>>>>> We really need an automated check for this ... and did VALIDATE really
>>>>> need to become a keyword at all, rather than picking some other syntax
>>>>> using existing keywords?
>>>> I think we ought to try to do something about this, so that VALIDATE
>>>> doesn't need to become a keyword.
>>>>
>>>> How about instead of VALIDATE CONSTRAINT we simply write ALTER
>>>> CONSTRAINT ... VALID? (Patch attached, passes make check.)
>>> ALTER CONSTRAINT ... VALID sounds like it just marks the constraint as
>>> valid. "VALIDATE CONSTRAINT" sounds like it scans and checks that the
>>> constraint is valid.
>> Yeah, it's a little awkward, but I think it's still better than adding
>> another keyword. Any other ideas for wording?
>
> CHECK VALID?
>
>
SET VALID? (c.f. SET NULL).
cheers
andrew
