On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 2:14 AM, Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki.takah...@oss.ntt.co.jp> wrote: >> 5. The use of the term "partition" is not very consistent. For >> example, we use CREATE PARTITION to create a partition, but we use >> DROP TABLE to get rid of it (there is no DROP PARTITION). I think >> that the right syntax to use here is ALTER TABLE ... ADD/DROP >> PARTITION; both Oracle and MySQL do it that way. And meanwhile >> OCLASS_PARTITION means "the partitioning information associated with >> the parent table", not "a partition of a parent table". > > "ALTER TABLE ... ADD/DROP PARTITION" was discussed many times, > but I cannot solve syntax confict with "ALTER TABLE ... ADD [COLUMN]". > Since we can omit COLUMN, parser treats "ADD PARTITION" as adding > a column named "PARTITION". We need to add PARTITION into the reserved > keyword list to avoid shift/reduce errors. > > Do you have any better idea?
No, I think we're going to need to at least partially reserve that keyword. However, SQL:2003 and SQL:2008 apparently have it as a reserved keyword, so I'm hoping we can get away with that. I don't think it's worth inventing a totally different (and, IMHO, not very appealing) syntax just to avoid reserving a keyword that is reserved in the standard. http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/sql-keywords-appendix.html -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
