On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 10:09 PM Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thank you for check. I am sending updated patch >
Alvaro has up thread suggested some alternative syntax [1] for this patch, but I don't see any good argument to not go with what he has proposed. In other words, why we should prefer the current syntax as in the patch over what Alvaro has proposed? IIUC, the current syntax implemented by the patch is: Drop Database [(options)] [If Exists] name Alvaro suggested using options at the end (and use optional keyword WITH) based on what other Drop commands does. I see some merits to that idea which are (a) if tomorrow we want to introduce new options like CASCADE, RESTRICT then it will be better to have all the options at the end as we have for other Drop commands, (b) It will resemble more with Create Database syntax. Now, I think the current syntax is also not bad and we already do something like that for other commands like Vaccum where options are provided before object_name, but I think in this case putting at the end is more appealing unless there are some arguments against that. One other minor comment: + + This will also fail, if the connections do not terminate in 5 seconds. + </para> Is there any implementation in the patch for the above note? [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20190903164633.GA16408%40alvherre.pgsql -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
