Thread: INCLUDING COMPRESSION
The syntax for like_option in CREATE TABLE docs seems to forget to mention INCLUDING COMPRESSION option. I think the following fix is necessary. Patch attached. -{ INCLUDING | EXCLUDING } { COMMENTS | CONSTRAINTS | DEFAULTS | GENERATED | IDENTITY | INDEXES | STATISTICS | STORAGE |ALL } +{ INCLUDING | EXCLUDING } { COMMENTS | COMPRESSION | CONSTRAINTS | DEFAULTS | GENERATED | IDENTITY | INDEXES | STATISTICS| STORAGE | ALL } Regards, -- Fujii Masao Advanced Computing Technology Center Research and Development Headquarters NTT DATA CORPORATION
Attachment
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:46:58PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > The syntax for like_option in CREATE TABLE docs seems to forget to mention > INCLUDING COMPRESSION option. I think the following fix is necessary. > Patch attached. > > -{ INCLUDING | EXCLUDING } { COMMENTS | CONSTRAINTS | DEFAULTS | GENERATED | IDENTITY | INDEXES | STATISTICS | STORAGE| ALL } > +{ INCLUDING | EXCLUDING } { COMMENTS | COMPRESSION | CONSTRAINTS | DEFAULTS | GENERATED | IDENTITY | INDEXES | STATISTICS| STORAGE | ALL } Indeed. May I ask at the same time why gram.y (TableLikeOption) and parsenodes.h (CREATE_TABLE_LIKE_COMPRESSION) don't classify this new option in alphabetical order with the rest? Ordering them makes easier a review of them. -- Michael
Attachment
On 2021/04/15 11:54, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:46:58PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >> The syntax for like_option in CREATE TABLE docs seems to forget to mention >> INCLUDING COMPRESSION option. I think the following fix is necessary. >> Patch attached. >> >> -{ INCLUDING | EXCLUDING } { COMMENTS | CONSTRAINTS | DEFAULTS | GENERATED | IDENTITY | INDEXES | STATISTICS | STORAGE| ALL } >> +{ INCLUDING | EXCLUDING } { COMMENTS | COMPRESSION | CONSTRAINTS | DEFAULTS | GENERATED | IDENTITY | INDEXES | STATISTICS| STORAGE | ALL } > > Indeed. Thanks! Pushed. > May I ask at the same time why gram.y (TableLikeOption) and > parsenodes.h (CREATE_TABLE_LIKE_COMPRESSION) don't classify this new > option in alphabetical order with the rest? Ordering them makes > easier a review of them. I'm not sure why. But +1 to make them in alphabetical order. Patch attached. Regards, -- Fujii Masao Advanced Computing Technology Center Research and Development Headquarters NTT DATA CORPORATION
Attachment
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 11:24:07PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > I'm not sure why. But +1 to make them in alphabetical order. > Patch attached. LGTM. -- Michael
Attachment
On 2021/04/16 10:20, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 11:24:07PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >> I'm not sure why. But +1 to make them in alphabetical order. >> Patch attached. > > LGTM. Pushed. Thanks! Regards, -- Fujii Masao Advanced Computing Technology Center Research and Development Headquarters NTT DATA CORPORATION