Greetings, * Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > On 2018-Dec-14, Stephen Frost wrote: > > > > My vote goes to put the keyword inside of and exclusively in the > > > parenthesized option list. > > > > I disagree with the idea of exclusively having concurrently be in the > > parentheses. 'explain buffers' is a much less frequently used option > > (though that might, in part, be because it's a bit annoying to write out > > explain (analyze, buffers) select...; I wonder if we could have a way to > > say "if I'm running analyze, I always want buffers"...), > > I'm skeptical. I think EXPLAIN ANALYZE is more common because it has > more than one decade of advantage compared to the more detailed option > list. Yes, it's also easier, but IMO it's a brain thing (muscle > memory), not a fingers thing.
I would argue that it's both. > > but concurrently reindexing a table (or index..) is going to almost > > certainly be extremely common, perhaps even more common than *not* > > reindexing concurrently. > > Well, users can use the reindexdb utility and save some keystrokes. That's a really poor argument as those unix utilities are hardly ever used, in my experience. > Anyway we don't typically add redundant ways to express the same things. > Where we have them, it's just because the old way was there before, and > we added the extensible way later. Adding two in the first appearance > of a new feature seems absurd to me. SQL allows many, many different ways to express the same thing. I agree that we haven't done that much in our utility commands, but I don't see that as an argument against doing so, just that we haven't (previously) really had the need- because most of the time we don't have a bunch of different options where we want to have a list. > After looking at the proposed grammar again today and in danger of > repeating myself, IMO allowing the concurrency keyword to appear outside > the parens would be a mistake. Valid commands: > > REINDEX (VERBOSE, CONCURRENTLY) TABLE foo; > REINDEX (CONCURRENTLY) INDEX bar; This discussion hasn't changed my opinion, and, though I'm likely repeating myself as well, I also agree with the down-thread comment that this ship really has already sailed. Thanks! Stephen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
