On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 3:54 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> writes: >> David E. Wheeler wrote: >>> +1 if it prevents indexes from being named "CONCURRENTLY". > >> Yeah, if you really want to have an index named like that you can use >> double quotes. Seems a sensible compromise. > > Well, this will also break tables and columns named "concurrently". > I think the odds of it being a problem are small, but still it is > a reserved word that shouldn't be reserved according to the SQL spec.
I suppose we could fix this by specifying a precedence and then explicitly checking if you're trying to make an index named concurrently and fixing it up later. Not unlike how you suggested we avoid making WITH a reserved word with the comment that there was more than one way to skin a cat -- greg -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
