From: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, elein <elein(at)varlena(dot)com>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Tutorial |
Date: | 2004-07-23 19:34:13 |
Message-ID: | 20040723193413.GW7751@fetter.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 03:31:47PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> > What *is* broken is table inheritance, and the docs need to reflect
> > this.
>
> The combination of inheritance with certain other features is broken,
> yes, and the docs do reflect that (see the bottom of
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.4/static/ddl-inherit.html
> for example).
>
> I will grant you that this page is a near duplicate of the
> tutorial's discussion of inheritance, which is surely bad --- either
> they should be exact duplicates, or one or the other needs
> rewriting. But I'm not really going to hold still for the docs on
> inheritance being rewritten by someone who considers the entire
> concept broken. Maybe we can get elein to do it ;-)
I don't consider the concept broken. The implementation is, in fact,
broken, and putting that broken piece in the tutorial is, imnsho, a
bad mistake.
Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter david(at)fetter(dot)org http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100 mobile: +1 415 235 3778
Remember to vote!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | elein | 2004-07-23 20:25:56 | Re: [HACKERS] Tutorial |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-23 19:31:47 | Re: [HACKERS] Tutorial |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | elein | 2004-07-23 20:25:56 | Re: [HACKERS] Tutorial |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-23 19:31:47 | Re: [HACKERS] Tutorial |