From: | Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: multiple action rules |
Date: | 2005-06-23 12:39:50 |
Message-ID: | 1119530390.8208.41.camel@state.g2switchworks.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 20:28, Tom Lane wrote:
> Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com> writes:
> > Well, what really gets me is that basically, the syntax diagram in
> > the psql environment has a syntax diagram that makes sense to me.
>
> > So I guess if there was a "patch" it would basically reference the syntax
> > rules given by psql \h create rule in the documentation.
>
> Hmm? psql's \h output is mechanically extracted from the sgml docs.
> Or are you looking at someplace other than the CREATE RULE reference
> page?
I don't think you caught the end of my message. I was looking at the
7.4 docs when I started writing, but by the end had gone to the
developer docs, where the change is already made. So there's no need
for a patch for that.
Now I'm thinking I should make a patch for a demonstration of making a
rule with >1 action though...
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hugo | 2005-06-23 12:41:09 | Re: setting up PostgreSQL on Linux RHL9 to allow ODBC connections from Windows |
Previous Message | Douglas McNaught | 2005-06-23 12:12:04 | Re: Changing password for the postgres user? |