On 20 October 2015 at 11:59, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Tomas Vondra > > <tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >>>> ISTM that we could use COLLECT STATISTICS instead of ADD STATISTICS, > and > >>>> use REMOVE STATISTICS instead of DROP STATISTICS. That way we can use > >>>> ALTER TABLE rather than inventing a new command. 5 minute change... > > >> That seems like a neat idea, actually. I'm not sure COLLECT is a good > choice > >> as it suggest the statistics is actually built, but that only happens > during > >> ANALYZE. But otherwise this seems to solve the issues with keywords and > it's > >> quite simple. > > > But ADD is no better there. I think ALTER TABLE .. COLLECT STATISTICS > > isn't any worse than ALTER TABLE ... CLUSTER ON index_name. In both > > cases, it means, when you do this operation, do it this way. > > > I would suggest that instead of DROP or REMOVE, the opposite should be > > ALTER TABLE .. NO COLLECT STATISTICS. > > Why is this an improvement over using already-existing keywords? >
The earlier patch changed the grammar for the DROP (column) subcommand, which I am saying is not acceptable. So by using an alternate keyword we are able to keep the existing syntax untouched. I suggested the word COLLECT since that is another word commonly used in conjunction with STATISTICS (at least in DB2 and Teradata). -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ <http://www.2ndquadrant.com/> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
