Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Dec 23, 2009, at 3:52 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Uh ... I don't see what that fixes? If CONCURRENTLY can be a column >> name this is still ambiguous.
> How? Because CONCURRENTLY can still be reduced as tricky_index_name, so it still doesn't know how to parse CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY ON ... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers