Re: adding tab completions

On Sat, Jun 09, 2018 at 06:42:12PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > Moreover there is no such completion for example for the command (it shows
> > only first column):
> > 
> > CREATE INDEX ON test (
> 
> Noted (I misunderstood at first: you just mean there's precedent that column
> names aren't completed, except maybe the first).

Yes, exactly. It was about the precedent.

> I can revise patch to not complete attributes in analyze; but, I think that
> means that this will have to complete to table names:
> 
> 	postgres=# ANALYZE tt (a , 
> 	alu_enodeb_201601     information_schema.
> 	alu_enodeb_201602     jrn_pg_buffercache
> 	...
> 
> .. since, without checking for matching parens, it has no idea whether to
> complete with rels or atts.  WDYT?

IMHO, I'd leave the code as simple as possible. It is up to you of
course. But it is easy to add completion for a first attribute, by
adding the condition (and leave other attributes without completion):

else if (HeadMatches1("VACUUM") && TailMatches1("("))
    COMPLETE_WITH_ATTR(prev2_wd, "");

> > > -			"SERVER", "INDEX", "LANGUAGE", "POLICY", "PUBLICATION", "RULE",
> > > +			"SERVER", "INDEX", "LANGUAGE", "POLICY", "PUBLICATION",
> > 
> > Is this a typo? I think still there is a possibility to comment rules.
> 
> Not in PG11(b1) (note, that's a custom table)
> 	postgres=# COMMENT ON RULE pg_settings_u IS 'asdf';
> 	ERROR:  syntax error at or near "IS"
> ...
> Remove deprecated COMMENT ON RULE syntax
> e8d016d81940e75c126aa52971b7903b7301002e

Oh, I understood what it is it here. Those commit removed the syntax:

COMMENT ON RULE rule_name

But still there is the syntax:

COMMENT ON RULE rule_name ON table_name

I can run the command:

COMMENT ON RULE rtest ON test IS 'rtest';

> > The last point I've noticed, there is no VERBOSE entry after VACUUM FULL
> > ANALYZE command anymore.
> 
> See commit 921059bd6, above (it's not 100% clear to me that's intended to
> reject VACUUM ANALYZE VERBOSE and not just reject VACUUM VERBOSE ANALYZE
> VERBOSE, but I tentatively assume it's intentional).

Right. Understood.

> > I'm not sure how this patch should be commited. Can it be commited
> > outside the commitfest? Otherwise add it to the next commitfest please
> > in order not to forget it.
> 
> I've done https://commitfest.postgresql.org/18/1661/

Thank you!

-- 
Arthur Zakirov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
Russian Postgres Company