Re: minor doc fix - garbage in example of result of unnest

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: minor doc fix - garbage in example of result of unnest
Date: 2020-06-05 16:19:22
Message-ID: 1505611.1591373962@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 09:56:54AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> That's not "garbage", I put it there intentionally.

> I don't see where having the row counts in the output adds clarity and it
> just more text for the reader to mentally filter out.

Seems like I'm getting outvoted here. If there aren't other votes,
I'll change it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2020-06-05 16:33:17 Re: significant slowdown of HashAggregate between 9.6 and 10
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-06-05 16:17:54 Re: valgrind error