Re: rc1 tarball contains partially outdated/missing man pages

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: rc1 tarball contains partially outdated/missing man pages
Date: 2009-06-19 16:12:50
Message-ID: 8355.1245427970@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> On Thursday 18 June 2009 23:15:53 Tom Lane wrote:
>> BTW, as far as that particular point goes: maybe we could fix the tools
>> issues underlying this, but I'm tempted to think that it's not worth the
>> trouble, because making these man pages be aliases for SELECT is just
>> the Wrong Thing anyway. I think we should just split them off and have
>> them be documented as separate top-level reference pages.

> Umm, the reason why it is that way now is that you did not want them to be
> separate top-level man pages:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/19886.1226171409@sss.pgh.pa.us

Well, at the time I thought that WITH would only be a sub-clause of
SELECT. The idea that we might allow it to be attached to INSERT etc
causes me to revise my opinion a bit. Do you have a preference one
way or the other about how to do this?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stefan Kaltenbrunner 2009-06-19 17:49:31 Re: 8.4 open item: copy performance regression?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-06-19 16:03:13 Re: BUG #4862: different results in to_date() between 8.3.7 & 8.4.RC1