On 27 January 2018 at 00:03, Tels <nospam-pg-ab...@bloodgate.com> wrote: > Looking at the patch, at first I thought the order was sorted and you > swapped STORAGE and STATISTICS by accident. But then, it seems the order > is semi-random. Should that list be sorted or is it already sorted by some > criteria that I don't see? > > - <literal>INCLUDING DEFAULTS INCLUDING IDENTITY INCLUDING > CONSTRAINTS INCLUDING INDEXES INCLUDING STORAGE INCLUDING > COMMENTS</literal>. > + <literal>INCLUDING DEFAULTS INCLUDING IDENTITY INCLUDING > CONSTRAINTS INCLUDING INDEXES INCLUDING STORAGE INCLUDING STATISTICS > INCLUDING COMMENTS</literal>.
It looks like they were in order of how they're defined in enum TableLikeOption up until [1], then I'm not so sure what the new order is based on after that. I'd offer to put it back to the order of the enum, but I want to minimise the invasiveness of the patch. I'm not sure yet if it should be classed as a bug fix or a new feature. On looking at this I realised I missed changing the syntax synopsis. The attached adds this. [1] https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=3217327053638085d24dd4d276e7c1f7ac2c4c6b -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
create_table_like_statistics_v2.patch
Description: Binary data
