Re: CREATE TABLE .. LIKE .. EXCLUDING documentation

> On 29 Jun 2018, at 07:56, Yugo Nagata <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:22:15 -0700
> "David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>> ​Maybe try something like:
>>
>> It is legal to specify the same option multiple times - e.g., "INCLUDING
>> option EXCLUDING option" - the outcome is whichever comes last in the
>> command (i.e., in the example, option is excluded).
>
> Certainly. However, it seems to me that example is also redundant.
> I rewrote this as follows:
>
> It is legal to specify multiple options for the same kind of object.
> If they conflict, latter options always override former options.
>
> Does this make sense?

I think this wording makes sense and is clear. Only found a small typo:

+ This is tipically used after <literal>INCLUDING ALL</literal>.

s/tipically/typically/

cheers ./daniel