From: | PG Doc comments form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | martin(dot)kalcher(at)aboutsource(dot)net |
Subject: | Proposal to improve uniq function documentation in intarray extension |
Date: | 2022-06-01 10:20:44 |
Message-ID: | 165407884456.573551.8779012279828726162@wrigleys.postgresql.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/intarray.html
Description:
The **uniq** function in the **intarray** extension removes **adjacent**
duplicates from an integer array. The documentation[0] about this behavior
is correct, but the example is a bit misleading, because it sorts the array
before applying uniq. The sort can be overlooked **easily** and leads to the
impression that **uniq** removes all duplicates from the array.
I propse to change the example to somthing like that:
uniq('{1,2,2,3,1,1}'::integer[]) → {1,2,3,1}
It might be a good idea to refer to the **sort** function in case one wants
to remove all duplicates.
Cheers, Martin Kalcher
[0]
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/intarray.html#INTARRAY-FUNC-TABLE
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | jian he | 2022-06-03 06:45:44 | pg_stat_database view column xact_commit description should be more descriptive? |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2022-05-31 20:03:16 | Re: Should we really recommend "-A md5 or -A password"? |