Re: [PATCH] Automatic HASH and LIST partition creation

>
> Why? We could accept anything in the list? i.e.:
>
>     (ident =? value[, ident =? value]*)
>
> > I don't against this but as far as I've heard there is some
> > opposition among PG community against new keywords. Maybe I am wrong.
>
> the ident is a keyword that can be interpreted later on, not a "reserved
> keyword" from a parser perspective, which is the only real issue?
>
> The parser does not need to know about it, only the command interpreter
> which will have to interpret it. AUTOMATIC is a nice parser cue to
> introduce such a ident-value list.
>
> > 2. The existing syntax for declarative partitioning is different to your
> > proposal.
>
> Yep. I think that it was not so good a design choice from a
> language/extensibility perspective.
>
Thank you very much, Fabien. It is clear enough.
BTW could you tell me a couple of words about pros and cons of c-code
syntax parsing comparing to parsing using gram.y trees? I think both are
possible but my predisposition was that we'd better use the later if
possible.

Best regards,
Pavel Borisov

>