Re: Document "59.2. Built-in Operator Classes" have a clerical error?

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, osdba <mailtch(at)163(dot)com>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Document "59.2. Built-in Operator Classes" have a clerical error?
Date: 2020-08-22 18:59:02
Message-ID: 20200822185902.GA11024@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

On 2020-Aug-22, Tom Lane wrote:

> If you don't want to go all the way and list the operators with their
> input types, maybe we should just do what the OP thought was correct
> and delete the duplicate operator names. It's already the case that
> the table isn't telling you exactly which input types the operators
> accept, so why not be a little bit fuzzier?

Well, if we're going to have a table, let's have a useful table. What's
wrong with using the same contents \dAo shows? It seemed reasonable
enough to me.

Now of course I would suggest that other client programs such as pgAdmin
ought to display what \dAo shows too ;-)

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2020-08-22 20:18:30 Re: Create a Foreign Table for PostgreSQL CSV Logs
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2020-08-22 17:51:56 Re: Create a Foreign Table for PostgreSQL CSV Logs