On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 2:16 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 12/13/15 9:16 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Please see the attached to address those things (and others) with
>> extra fixes for a couple of comments.
>
> I have ported these changes to the new world order and divided
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> One thing I just noticed is that CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY cannot be
> used within CREATE SCHEMA, so perhaps the lines that match the
> CONCURRENTLY keyword should use Matches() rather than TailMatches().
> Similarly (but perhaps this is not
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 12/13/15 9:16 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Please see the attached to address those things (and others) with
> > extra fixes for a couple of comments.
>
> I have ported these changes to the new world order and divided them up
> into more logical changes that are
On 12/13/15 9:16 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Please see the attached to address those things (and others) with
> extra fixes for a couple of comments.
I have ported these changes to the new world order and divided them up
into more logical changes that are more clearly documented. Please
check
On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> These two tab completion pieces look strange to me:
>
> /* If we have CREATE|UNIQUE INDEX CONCURRENTLY, then add "ON" */
> else if ((pg_strcasecmp(prev3_wd, "INDEX") == 0 ||
>
These two tab completion pieces look strange to me:
/* If we have CREATE|UNIQUE INDEX CONCURRENTLY, then add "ON" */
else if ((pg_strcasecmp(prev3_wd, "INDEX") == 0 ||
pg_strcasecmp(prev2_wd, "INDEX") == 0) &&
pg_strcasecmp(prev_wd, "CONCURRENTLY") == 0)