Craig Ringer <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > What gets me with Pg's COMMENT ON is the way the comments have to be > separate from, and after, the objects they refer to. IMO it'd be > significantly preferable to have something like: > CREATE TABLE X ( > somepk integer primary key, > cost numeric(10,2) COMMENT 'blah blah', > ); > .. with a similar clause for CONSTRAINT. > Is there any particular objection to doing things this way? You're infringing on SQL-standard syntax space if you do that. Now maybe they'll never define some conflicting extension to the CREATE TABLE syntax, but it seems to me to be taking a risk for not a whole lot of gain. Now, if you could persuade the SQL committee to standardize syntax like the above, that'd be great. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
