On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Jeff Davis <pg...@j-davis.com> writes: >> We can either eliminate the USING variant from opt_class (unless it's >> necessary for some reason or I missed it in the documentation), or we >> can use another word (e.g. WITH or WITH OPERATOR) if you don't like >> CHECK. > > Hmm ... we don't seem to have documented the USING noise-word, so it > probably would be safe to remove it; but why take a chance? I don't > particularly agree with Peter's objection to CHECK. There are plenty > of examples in SQL of the same keyword being used for different purposes > in nearby places. Indeed you could make about the same argument to > object to USING, since it'd still be there in "USING access_method" > elsewhere in the same command. > > I think that USING is just about as content-free as WITH in this > particular example --- it doesn't give you any hint about what the > purpose of the operator is.
USING might be just as content-free as WITH, but USING OPERATOR seems clearly better, at least IMO. Also, this patch has not been updated in a week, and the clock is ticking: if we don't have an updated version RSN, we need to move this to Returned with Feedback and wait until next CommitFest. That would be too bad; this is an awesome feature. Thanks, ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
