On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 01:40:59PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> writes: > > On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 06:28:53PM +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > >> prior/after? Both are unreserved keywords atm and it seems far less > >> likely to have conflicts than new/old. > > > BEFORE/AFTER seems more logical to me. > > Works for me. > > regards, tom lane
Maybe we can make BEFORE and AFTER implied aliases rather than keywords. What say? Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
