On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 04:52:46PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 01:34:03PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 7:29 PM, Peter Eisentraut > > > <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > > On 1/3/17 11:52 PM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > > > >> We will need to make CURRENT_DATABASE a reserved keyword. But I like > > > >> this idea more than COMMENT ON CURRENT DATABASE. > > > > > > > > We already have the reserved key word CURRENT_CATALOG, which is the > > > > standard spelling. But I wouldn't be bothered if we made > > > > CURRENT_DATABASE somewhat reserved as well. > > > > > > Maybe I'm just lacking in imagination, but what's the argument against > > > spelling it CURRENT DATABASE? AFAICS, that doesn't require reserving > > > anything new at all, and it also looks more SQL-ish to me. SQL > > > generally tries to emulate English, and I don't normally > > > speak_hyphenated_words. > > > > I assume it is to match our use of CURRENT_USER as having special > > meaning. > > CURRENT_USER is a standards-mandated keyword, but CURRENT_DATABASE is > not. The closest thing SQL has is CURRENT_CATALOG, which is the string > that identifies the "current default catalog". This would lead us to > COMMENT ON DATABASE CURRENT_CATALOG > > Do we want that spelling? It looks ugly to me.
Agreed. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers