Re: incorrect (incomplete) description for "alter domain"

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: "elionescu(at)yahoo(dot)com" <elionescu(at)yahoo(dot)com>, "pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: incorrect (incomplete) description for "alter domain"
Date: 2024-07-29 14:58:06
Message-ID: 2585954.1722265086@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

"David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Monday, July 29, 2024, PG Doc comments form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org>
> wrote:
>> In the Synopsis section of
>> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-alterdomain.html
>> this is incorrect (incomplete):
>> "ALTER DOMAIN name ADD domain_constraint [ NOT VALID ]"
>> It should be
>> "ALTER DOMAIN name ADD CONSTRAINT domain_constraint [ NOT VALID ]"

> The definition of “domain_constraint” includes the optional “constraint
> constraint_name” clause. Though reading the page and seeing the number of
> times we say “alter domain add constraint” I even more inclined to agree
> that bringing the word constraint there is desirable. I am not a huge fan
> of the indirect syntax references anyway.

I think the page is technically correct, but I'm inclined to duplicate
this text from the CREATE DOMAIN page:

where domain_constraint is:

[ CONSTRAINT constraint_name ]
{ NOT NULL | NULL | CHECK (expression) }

rather than making readers go look that up. Is that the same thing
you're thinking, or did you have a different idea?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2024-07-29 15:17:41 Re: incorrect (incomplete) description for "alter domain"
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2024-07-29 14:13:50 Re: Typo in 15.3.4