Tom Lane wrote:
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Holger Schurig [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* psql tab-completion, it favours now CLUSTER table ORDER BY index
It occurs to me (sorry that I didn't think of this earlier) that if we're
going to use ORDER BY it really ought to take a list
Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Though I don't think we're implementing CLUSTER table ORDER BY col1,
col2 anytime soon, ORDER BY does imply that a list of columns is to
follow. How about CLUSTER table USING index?
+1 ... AFAIR there was 0 discussion of the exact syntax before,
+1 ... AFAIR there was 0 discussion of the exact syntax before,
so I don't feel wedded to ORDER BY.
A changed patch comes with the next e-mail.
I can not create a patch for CLUSTER table USING col1,col2,col3,
because I'm not yet deep into postgresql and don't have the time
for that. I just
The following table add's a new variant of the CLUSTER command. The old
variants are preserved, as suggested in the TODO entry.
Things I changed:
* The grammar
* psql help text
* psql tab-completion, it favours now CLUSTER table ORDER BY index
* two uses of CLUSTER in the regression, so that
Holger Schurig [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* psql tab-completion, it favours now CLUSTER table ORDER BY index
It occurs to me (sorry that I didn't think of this earlier) that if we're
going to use ORDER BY it really ought to take a list columns. It would be
more consistent with what ORDER BY
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Holger Schurig [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* psql tab-completion, it favours now CLUSTER table ORDER BY index
It occurs to me (sorry that I didn't think of this earlier) that if we're
going to use ORDER BY it really ought to take a list columns.
Surely
