Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> OK, let me see if I can summarize what I think we've agreed to: >> >> CREATE syntax is extended to >> >> CREATE EXTENSION extname [WITH] [SCHEMA s] [VERSION v] [FROM oldv]
> It strikes me that if you used the same options syntax here that we're > already using for EXPLAIN and VACUUM and COPY, you wouldn't have to > worry about adding keywords for current or future options. Hmm. You have a point, and there's some precedent for this in our other non-standard CREATE commands such as CREATE OPERATOR and CREATE AGGREGATE. On the other hand, we have no precedent for handling ALTER syntaxes that way. Also, I think most people feel that the CREATE OPERATOR and CREATE AGGREGATE syntaxes are ugly, not-very-SQL-ish beasts carried over from PostQUEL days. On the whole I have a weak preference for leaving it as above, but would readily yield to a consensus to do the other. One minor point is that I was planning to drop the opt_equals from the syntax --- it doesn't fit at all with the FROM case. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers