Csaba Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Strictly speaking, however, it would have to be NOLOCKLY in that case. :-)
> In this case CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY ... sounds better to me, although
> the whole feature sounds nice any way you will finally call it ;-)
That reads well to me too. We'd need to check whether it can be parsed
without making CONCURRENTLY a fully-reserved word, but offhand I think
it would work because ON is already a fully-reserved word ...
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
